Prime Minister Dodik,

Fellow Ministers,

Dear Friends,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me start off by thanking the Economist magazine for putting together this important event.

I will try to discuss three inter-related themes with you this morning: the region’s European future and how to secure it, Serbia’s forthcoming parliamentary elections, and the Kosovo situation.

But I would like first to place this discussion in a global strategic context.

We live in transformational times. A great deal of the world is in flux; the fault lines are multiplying. Across the world, the disparate forces of democracy are faced with an uphill struggle. Trans-national friendships continue to shift as interests diverge and comprehensive alternatives are postulated. A source of commonality remains the observance of the easterly drift of the global balance of power, together with a growing recognition that the international community is becoming less coherent and less predictable.

Sensing the significance of this moment, we in the Balkans feel somewhat uneasy about its implications. I don’t think we’re behind the curve on this: much of Europe feels the same way. But in our region, the disquietude is somewhat more acute. The reason is that in the Western Balkans, fundamental matters are still in the process of being settled, resolved, and decided upon. And so we tend to face new circumstances with greater trepidation.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The great philosopher of democracy Montesquieu wrote that government should be set up so that no man need be afraid of another.

This is the all-too-often submerged basis of the European project. Recall how it began: with the reconciliation of two age-old adversaries after the Second World War. How it continues today: with the absorption of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. And how it will hopefully culminate: in the integration of the Western Balkans, including Serbia.

When it comes right down to it, the European project is about transformative institutions which ensure that no man need be afraid of another.

Such an understanding makes possible the belief that today’s hopes will become tomorrow’s realities.

And it makes it possible for us in the Balkans to liken the process of EU accession to the state of mind of walking safely with one another, through a succession of open doors, towards a common future.

In short, achieving membership would bring us together in democracy as never before. And that is why membership in the European Union should be the ultimate goal of all the nations in the Western Balkans.

Belonging to Europe can unify a country; it can consolidate its national identity; and it can do so in a non-threatening way that results in its incorporation into a broader, more cosmopolitan fabric of distinctiveness. For Europe is the embodiment of a commitment to national transformation. It is an antidote to self-isolation and the poverty of options that would result.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We have before us an opportunity to consolidate the region’s tremendous democratic progress since the passing of its dictators. But only if we seize it—only if we can find a way to harness it constructively and cultivate it responsibly—can we fulfill the promise of the peace dividend that stands ready for the taking, just a little ways off from the path we are now on.

The route to consolidating the future is not without its obstacles, and it is not sufficient to have a strategic vision of where you want to end up. Of equal importance is being in sure possession of a tactical understanding of how to get there. Putting them together wisely constitutes the craft of state—a rare quality among any generation of politicians.

Thankfully, we have such men of vision and ability in Serbia. And they exist throughout the Western Balkans. But the region’s statesmen need to be understood, not pressured beyond the breaking-point.

And this brings me to the SAA question. Serbia is ready to sign the SAA immediately. I want you all to have no doubt about this. And I want to take this opportunity to say to you in all candor: this is the time for Serbia to sign the SAA. By making this happen, by overcoming the reticence that we still feel in some quarters, the member-states will in effect be saying to our democracy that all doubts about us being welcome in the European Union have been removed. And that would go a long way to secure regional stability.

To sum up, I believe that if choose to really think strategically about the steps we need to take together as partners, then we might just bridge the gap, fill over the divide, and be able to set a course for where we hope to end up.

But let me underline that the eventual success of the endeavor is not guaranteed. The future is not yet written. We do no one any good by pretending that it’s just a matter of “when” the states of the Western Balkans will become members of the European Union.

I am not trying to sound pessimistic, but I reject the idealism of some who naively want to believe that the only outcome is the one they wish for—that our destiny, that is to say, their preferred outcome, has been determined for us in advance.

I reject it because such an approach to politics is puerile.

And hasn’t our region seen too much irresponsible behavior to have the luxury to make political assumptions on the basis of hopes discordant from realities?

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is from such a standpoint that I wish to discuss the forthcoming parliamentary and local elections that will take place in Serbia on May 11^th.

The result will be very close, and the discourse will be animated and polarizing. For these are dramatic times in Serbia—times in which confusion abounds, populism is resurfacing, and aspirations are being reformulated.

It will be a definitional election—the most important one in Serbia since October 2000. The result, whatever it may be, will produce radical consequences for the coming development of my country and the Western Balkans.

I say to you: this election will be about choosing the future course of Serbia. The main issue will be whether to choose Europe. Yes, I believe that the critical battle for the European soul of the Western Balkans is upon us, and that it will be fought at polling stations across my country.

And this brings me to the issue of Kosovo. For notwithstanding the fact that this election is about Serbia’s relationship with Europe, almost no voter’s choice will be unaffected by what has recently taken place in our southern province.

Let me therefore try to clarify the Kosovo issue in the context of our elections.

____

Make no mistake, on this fundamental issue—on this question that concerns the very nature of the identity of our nation—there is no disagreement in Serbia.

An overwhelming majority of our citizens are not prepared to give up our country’s sovereignty over Kosovo. We are strongly united on this issue. And we will remain so. We will continue defending our territorial integrity, and we will continue defending the rights of the Kosovo Serbs.

I believe that Serbia can build on the national unity forged by Kosovo to preserve a democratic nation that is whole and free—and that understands the strategic importance of forging ahead with our European membership perspective, while remaining actively engaged with the world.

This is a tall order. But we must rise to the challenge.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The unilateral, illegal and illegitimate declaration of independence of the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo from Serbia on February 17^th has greatly complicated domestic, regional and global politics.

There is no sense in downplaying this fact. We all know that it has.

For the first time since October 5^th, 2000, the European idea in Serbia is on the defensive. It is still a viable option, but it is no longer a foregone conclusion. It is no longer seen as our destiny, but as a decision for us to make—because Europe is today closely associated by many in Serbia with support for UDI. And that has resulted in a whole lot of uncertainty and commotion throughout the country.

On the regional front, as a result of UDI, the countries of the Western Balkans have inescapably been put in a situation to choose between Serbia and Kosovo. I want to be clear about this. There is no way for any country to have its cake and eat it too on this issue. Ambiguity is not possible: choosing to recognize the UDI of our province of Kosovo means choosing to explicitly disregard the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Serbia. The direct, regrettable corollary of such a choice is the downgrading of the comprehensive set of ties with my country.

And it’s a shame, for instead of rallying under the banner of regional solidarity, some have chosen to side with those beyond the Western Balkans who were in a hurry to impose a solution in our part of the world, while at the same time arguing that imposing solutions to similar conflicts in other areas of the globe would be, let us say, counterproductive.

____

Consequent to this choice to recognize, a revival of the debate about the legitimacy of internationally recognized borders has been triggered. For the illegal attempt by Kosovo to unilaterally secede from Serbia has created a precedent; a dangerous, perilous precedent that does fundamental damage to what we’re trying to create together—in this region, in the context of European integration.

This precedent legitimizes the doctrine of imposing solutions to ethnic conflicts. It legitimizes the act of unilateral secession by a provincial or other non-state actor. It transforms the right to self-determination into an avowed right to independence. It legitimizes the forced partition of internationally-recognized, sovereign states. It violates the commitment to the peaceful and consensual resolution of disputes in Europe. And it supplies any ethnic or religious group with a grievance against its capital with a play book on how to achieve their ends.

No amount of melodramatic arguments to the contrary will change this reality, if it is allowed to become set in stone.

____

Adding fuel to the fire, an unfair charge has been leveled against my country. It says that Serbia is to blame for the stalemate, that it’s our fault that we aren’t going along with carefully laid plans that have singularly failed to take our national interests into account.

Well, blaming the Serbs may ease the conscious of those who ought to know better, but it won’t solve the problem that we face—the problem of determining the future status of Kosovo in a way which ensures that all stakeholders can claim a share of the victory that a just solution would inevitably produce.

For sooner or later, when the dust settles, when the forty or so countries worldwide that choose to recognize the illegal declaration of independence by Pristina do so, we will all come face to face with a new, sobering reality: Kosovo will not be a member of the United Nations; it will not be a member of the OSCE. And as such it will not belong to the world community of sovereign nations. It won’t acquire this ultimate status of legitimacy. It will remain unattractive to foreign investment; unresponsive to the rule of law; and incapable of preventing its freefall to failure without the engagement of Belgrade.

When the underlying implications of such a destabilizing outcome sink in, a new window of opportunity will open up. And it could create the conditions to forge a comprehensive settlement to the province’s future status—one based on the European way of coming to an agreement: through compromise, concession and consensus-building.

The question is whether we will have the strategic foresight to take advantage of its possibilities.

This will not be easy. Nothing in Europe is easy. But everything is possible.

And yet there are those who will object. They could claim that some things are beyond the scope of the achievable, or repeat, mantra-like, that a new reality is upon us.

Well, the Greek author Nikos Kazantzakis had a response to such cynicism. He said, “let us change the eyes which see reality.”

Let our eyes see a deeper reality.

Let them see reality through eyes of prudence and courage, vision and boldness.

Let them see the occasion to come for what it will be: a chance to solve Kosovo for good and pave the way to the ultimate consolidation of the European future of the Western Balkans.

Thank you for your attention.

Director General Matsura,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is an honor to address you this afternoon. Let me begin by thanking our esteemed Director General for having presented the reports to us, and to express my gratitude to all who took a hand in their preparation.

I would like particularly to commend documents 179 EX/4 and 179/EX/5. They clearly summarize the activities that took place over the course of the 2006-2007 biennale, in line with our short- and medium-term strategies.

We support the Organization’s structural reforms, as well as an increase in cross-sector cooperation.

And the Republic of Serbia underlines the importance of persisting in the struggle to eradicate illiteracy and promote gender equality, in the context of providing for equal access to education. UNESCO ought to remain a global leader in this field, serving as a laboratory of ideas.

We also support the new strategy for strengthening scientific capacities at the national and regional level. I underline the importance of the International Basic Sciences Programme framework that has enabled us to successfully cooperate with both the UNESCO Secretariat and its Regional Office in Venice. For example, in 2003, the Faculty of Science of the University of Niš became the coordinator of the Southeast European Network in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics. Since that time, it has significantly expanded its institutional and curricula network—and has even transcended its regional boundaries.

I underline my country’s close cooperation with UNESCO in the field of sustainable water programs. I recall that the International Research and Training Center on Urban Drainage was established at the Faculty of Civil Engineering of the University of Belgrade back in 1987, and that our Director General honored the Center with a stop-over during his 2004 official visit to Serbia.

I am honored to confirm that UNESCO will sponsor an international conference entitled “Climate Change on the Eve of the Second Decade of the Twenty-First Century”, in May 2009. It will be hosted by the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, in honor of the 130^th anniversary of Milutin Milankovic—the visionary founder of a scientific approach to the study of climate change.

I am also honored to highlight the leading role of the Republic of Serbia in promoting regional cooperation. We took the lead in following up on the conclusions of the High-Level Conference on Strengthening Cooperation in Southeast Europe, held at UNESCO headquarters in April 2002. Deepening regional cooperation contributes to the democratic consolidation of peace, stability and reconciliation—gateways to the attainment of the European future of the Western Balkans.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Republic of Serbia continues to uphold the enduring role of UNESCO: to construct an impregnable defense of peace in the minds of men and women through the bridging of differences and the promotion of our common heritage and human rights.

The greatest challenge to human rights in Serbia lies in our southern province of Kosovo and Metohija, under United Nations administration since June 1999. Given UNESCO’s mandate, I shall limit myself to a brief discussion of the plight of our cultural and religious sites in the province over the past eight years.

More than 150 churches or monasteries, at last count, including dozens that were build as long ago as the 14^th century, have been set ablaze by Kosovo Albanian extremists in the past eight years, including 35 during the March 2004 pogrom against Serbs in Kosovo.

Hundreds of other holy sites remain at risk, something that has been recognized by UNESCO and its Centre for World Heritage. All four of our World Heritage designated sites that are located in our province of Kosovo have been placed on UNESCO’s List of World Heritage in Danger.

Serbia greatly appreciates UNESCO’s sensitivity in this area of our cooperation. Allow me therefore to give credit to the important work of the World Heritage Committee. We support its reorganization and consider it vital for its capacities to be strengthened.

I would also like to recognize the personal engagement of Director General Matsura, and to particularly thank Italy, Greece and the Czech Republic, together with the Council of Europe, for their help to restore and conserve the Serbian heritage in Kosovo. I can assure you that Serbia’s Ministry of Culture, together with our National Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments and the Holy Synod of the Serbian Orthodox Church, will expand their cooperation with the international community—in order to more effectively implement the protection, preservation and restoration of Serbian heritage sites in our province of Kosovo.

____

In conclusion, I want to underline the precise nature of the fight to preserve Serbian heritage in Kosovo—and to underscore its universality—in the context of the danger posed by the unilateral, illegal and illegitimate declaration of independence by the Kosovo Albanians on February 17^th.

The purposeful attempt to vandalize, loot, burn, desecrate, and destroy what others have built long ago, in the conviction that such deeds will contribute to the invention of an historical narrative of one’s own, must be condemned in the strongest possible terms, and identified clearly for what they are: zealous, fevered, revolting acts of cultural cleansing.

Such is reality in Kosovo today—a dark, ugly reality that stains the fabric of democratic achievements in the Western Balkans. No peoples can afford to build a common future on the ashes of a vanished bequest. To protect and enhance the cultural achievements of humankind is a great task before us all. For our heritage constitutes a foundation of identity, a basis of development, a tool of reconciliation, and an instrument of peace.

Thank you very much for your attention.

President Basescu,

Mr Secretary General,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me begin by thanking our Romanian hosts for their kind hospitality.

Serbia and Romania have a long history of friendship. A friendship reaffirmed on numerous occasions in times of war and in times of peace. And a friendship made even stronger by the circumstances of history—circumstances that saw both our nations ruled by regimes that have been overthrown by our peoples in the name of democracy.

Sharing a common border and common values, our destinies have intertwined for centuries. And that is why it is my distinct pleasure to address the Euroatlantic Partnership Council in the capital city of our staunch ally, on behalf of President Boris Tadic of the Republic of Serbia.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

South-Eastern Europe is still an importer of security. We need to work together to change this so that we can become net contributors to a new architecture of global peace.

Two questions constitute the heart of the matter: One, how do we advance the cause of collective security in our region? And two, how do we transform it into a better, more secure and prosperous place?

Our search for answers is made easier by the fact that the wars of the previous decade—which culminated in 78 days of the bombing of my country in 1999—are over in the Balkans. They brought us death, poverty, and refugees. And they have left in their wake bitterness, organized crime, and fragile democracies without fully consolidated national identities.

As a result of these wars, we still need peacekeepers in our part of the world. The largest number is deployed in our southern province of Kosovo. Over 15,000 KFOR troops are stationed there. We expect them to remain status-neutral, to maintain law and order, to work harder to close down one of the most lucrative organized crime routes into Europe, and—most importantly—to protect the Kosovo Serbs. Let me say it clearly: this most vulnerable community must not be allowed to become hostage to political competition and international rivalries.

Regretfully, some of the countries represented in this room have recently chosen to recognize the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo. As a result, a dangerous precedent has been established—one that legitimizes the forced partition of internationally recognized, sovereign states; and one that supplies any ethnic or religious group that has a grievance against its capital with a playbook on how to achieve its ends.

We have proclaimed the UDI null and void, and we will continue employing all diplomatic and political means to protect our sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We are a democracy that has made tremendous achievements since the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in October 2000. We have built up a market economy, strengthened our administrative system, transformed our military, and begun to engage with our PfP partners. We are a transition success story, despite the unique obstacles we have had to overcome.

And now, on May 11^th, we will have parliamentary elections. These will decide the future course of our country. I celebrate the fact that Serbia is in a position to democratically determine its own destiny, a right we fought long and hard to attain. The result of the election will be very close, and the discourse will be emotional and polarizing.

This is natural, for times of historical choice are in fact moments in which the dreams and demons of a society are ventilated. But it is also a moment in which the political leadership is tested to contain the demons and to give substance to the dreams.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We have to move to a permanent peace in the Balkans. We are not there yet.

We need to eliminate the flashpoints of potential violence in our region by creating a whole new set of incentives for all our populations. We must change the strategic framework so that frontiers matter less, while identities can be expressed in freedom and without fear.

For our part, we in Serbia are ready to engage. We want to move rapidly to ensure that there is a dialogue that prevents any further violence and more uncontrolled developments in Kosovo. We have already conveyed this both to the United Nations and the European Union. I convey this to you today. And I am pleased that our Ministry of Defense and the Serbian Army are in close contact with KFOR and the Secretary General.

We must build on this. We must restore trust and confidence in the local populations. That is the only way they will eliminate their fears, and stay away from the clutches of the fear-mongers who want to drive us all in a direction that promises only to make things worse.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There is a tendency in some quarters to keep blaming the Serbs. I’m afraid that is just an alibi for failure.

The regime of Slobodan Milosevic committed terrible deeds against the Kosovo Albanians. For eight years Serbia has not had a say in the administration of Kosovo, as per UNSCR 1244. But unfortunately, during that time, the tables have turned. Serbs in the enclaves walk in fear of stepping out of the perimeters in which they live. Thousands of murders remain uninvestigated. Tens of thousands of their destroyed homes remain unreconstructed. One hundred and fifty thousand IDPs are still unable to return to the province. And our churches continue to be threatened and desecrated—more than 150 at last count, including dozens that were build as long ago as the 14^th century, have been set ablaze by Kosovo Albanian extremists.

But the blame game will get us nowhere. We cannot impose trust; we cannot compel it; we cannot legislate it. We can only cultivate it. This process has been long overdue, and it needs to begin right away.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The real issue is how to make frontiers less relevant. And the answer to that is simple, very predictable, but well behind schedule. The answer is the European Union. Until our entire region is in the EU, governed by its values and practices, sharing sovereignty instead of fighting over it, the Western Balkans will always be a potential trouble spot.

In other words, we are at a strategic moment in which the past and the future are overlapping. To meet the global threats of the 21^st century, we need to address the regional challenges, and to do that we must tackle the local differences. Serbia is ready to act decisively, in concert with our partners, to overcome them.

That is why my country has devoted considerable efforts to ensure that our regional policies reflect our core belief in the importance of promoting common values, mutual understanding, reconciliation, and the sovereign equality of states. That is why we have joined the Partnership for Peace, why we actively participate in the myriad formats of the Euroatlantic Partnership Council, and why we constructively contribute to the region’s security institutions—including SEEGROUP, SEECAP, SEDM, as well as the Visegrad Group and the Adriatic Charter.

If we work together, if we pursue a course of action that places the collective responsibility of statecraft at the foundation of the steps that need to be taken, then we will have created for ourselves a precious interlude in time. An interlude in which we can consolidate the region’s tremendous democratic progress since the passing of its dictators.

Let us not waste it.

Let us use it prudently—combining patience and courage, vision and foresight—by augmenting our security, and that of the rest of the world.

Thank you for your attention.

Address to the Euroatlantic Partnership Council

by H.E. Mr. Vuk Jeremić
Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Serbia

Bucharest, 3 April 2008

President Basescu,
Mr Secretary General,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me begin by thanking our Romanian hosts for their kind hospitality.

Serbia and Romania have a long history of friendship. A friendship reaffirmed on numerous occasions in times of war and in times of peace. And a friendship made even stronger by the circumstances of history—circumstances that saw both our nations ruled by regimes that have been overthrown by our peoples in the name of democracy.

Sharing a common border and common values, our destinies have intertwined for centuries. And that is why it is my distinct pleasure to address the Euroatlantic Partnership Council in the capital city of our staunch ally, on behalf of President Boris Tadic of the Republic of Serbia.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

South-Eastern Europe is still an importer of security. We need to work together to change this so that we can become net contributors to a new architecture of global peace.

Two questions constitute the heart of the matter: One, how do we advance the cause of collective security in our region? And two, how do we transform it into a better, more secure and prosperous place?

Our search for answers is made easier by the fact that the wars of the previous decade—which culminated in 78 days of the bombing of my country in 1999—are over in the Balkans. They brought us death, poverty, and refugees. And they have left in their wake bitterness, organized crime, and fragile democracies without fully consolidated national identities.

As a result of these wars, we still need peacekeepers in our part of the world. The largest number is deployed in our southern province of Kosovo. Over 15,000 KFOR troops are stationed there. We expect them to remain status-neutral, to maintain law and order, to work harder to close down one of the most lucrative organized crime routes into Europe, and—most importantly—to protect the Kosovo Serbs. Let me say it clearly: this most vulnerable community must not be allowed to become hostage to political competition and international rivalries.
Regretfully, some of the countries represented in this room have recently chosen to recognize the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo. As a result, a dangerous precedent has been established—one that legitimizes the forced partition of internationally recognized, sovereign states; and one that supplies any ethnic or religious group that has a grievance against its capital with a playbook on how to achieve its ends.
We have proclaimed the UDI null and void, and we will continue employing all diplomatic and political means to protect our sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We are a democracy that has made tremendous achievements since the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in October 2000. We have built up a market economy, strengthened our administrative system, transformed our military, and begun to engage with our PfP partners. We are a transition success story, despite the unique obstacles we have had to overcome.

And now, on May 11th, we will have parliamentary elections. These will decide the future course of our country. I celebrate the fact that Serbia is in a position to democratically determine its own destiny, a right we fought long and hard to attain. The result of the election will be very close, and the discourse will be emotional and polarizing.

This is natural, for times of historical choice are in fact moments in which the dreams and demons of a society are ventilated. But it is also a moment in which the political leadership is tested to contain the demons and to give substance to the dreams.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We have to move to a permanent peace in the Balkans. We are not there yet.

We need to eliminate the flashpoints of potential violence in our region by creating a whole new set of incentives for all our populations. We must change the strategic framework so that frontiers matter less, while identities can be expressed in freedom and without fear.

For our part, we in Serbia are ready to engage. We want to move rapidly to ensure that there is a dialogue that prevents any further violence and more uncontrolled developments in Kosovo. We have already conveyed this both to the United Nations and the European Union. I convey this to you today. And I am pleased that our Ministry of Defense and the Serbian Army are in close contact with KFOR and the Secretary General.

We must build on this. We must restore trust and confidence in the local populations. That is the only way they will eliminate their fears, and stay away from the clutches of the fear-mongers who want to drive us all in a direction that promises only to make things worse.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There is a tendency in some quarters to keep blaming the Serbs. I’m afraid that is just an alibi for failure.

The regime of Slobodan Milosevic committed terrible deeds against the Kosovo Albanians. For eight years Serbia has not had a say in the administration of Kosovo, as per UNSCR 1244. But unfortunately, during that time, the tables have turned. Serbs in the enclaves walk in fear of stepping out of the perimeters in which they live. Thousands of murders remain uninvestigated. Tens of thousands of their destroyed homes remain unreconstructed. One hundred and fifty thousand IDPs are still unable to return to the province. And our churches continue to be threatened and desecrated—more than 150 at last count, including dozens that were build as long ago as the 14th century, have been set ablaze by Kosovo Albanian extremists.

But the blame game will get us nowhere. We cannot impose trust; we cannot compel it; we cannot legislate it. We can only cultivate it. This process has been long overdue, and it needs to begin right away.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The real issue is how to make frontiers less relevant. And the answer to that is simple, very predictable, but well behind schedule. The answer is the European Union. Until our entire region is in the EU, governed by its values and practices, sharing sovereignty instead of fighting over it, the Western Balkans will always be a potential trouble spot.

In other words, we are at a strategic moment in which the past and the future are overlapping. To meet the global threats of the 21st century, we need to address the regional challenges, and to do that we must tackle the local differences. Serbia is ready to act decisively, in concert with our partners, to overcome them.

That is why my country has devoted considerable efforts to ensure that our regional policies reflect our core belief in the importance of promoting common values, mutual understanding, reconciliation, and the sovereign equality of states. That is why we have joined the Partnership for Peace, why we actively participate in the myriad formats of the Euroatlantic Partnership Council, and why we constructively contribute to the region’s security institutions—including SEEGROUP, SEECAP, SEDM, as well as the Visegrad Group and the Adriatic Charter.

If we work together, if we pursue a course of action that places the collective responsibility of statecraft at the foundation of the steps that need to be taken, then we will have created for ourselves a precious interlude in time. An interlude in which we can consolidate the region’s tremendous democratic progress since the passing of its dictators.

Let us not waste it.

Let us use it prudently—combining patience and courage, vision and foresight—by augmenting our security, and that of the rest of the world.

Thank you for your attention.

Mr. President,

Distinguished Guests,

Excellencies,

Dear Friends,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am honored to address this distinguished audience as part of my visit to your extraordinary country—one that has paid such a high price in securing its rightful place in the global community.

Since Viet Nam re-established its independence and began its colossal struggle for re-unification, you have offered an outstretched hand to all the nations of the world, on the basis of mutual respect, equality, and friendship.

Serbia too is such a country.

This morning, I will try to lay out for you the way we view the international system and our place in it, as well as discuss our relations with the friendly Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. I will touch upon our goal of attaining membership in the European Union, and spend time discussing Serbia’s approach to our region, Southeast Europe. I will also discuss the challenge to our sovereignty and territorial integrity posed by the unilateral and illegal declaration of independence of our southern province of Kosovo and Metohija, and the dangers to the international system that have resulted from this precedent-setting act.

I have just come from laying a wreath at the mausoleum of the founder of modern Viet Nam, Ho Chi Minh, one of the most important figures of the 20^th century. Before leaving for Hanoi, I asked to see the commemorative album of his historic visit to Yugoslavia in 1957, the very year our two countries established diplomatic relations.

President Tito was a generous host, paying tribute to the revolutionary struggle of the Vietnamese people. He spoke of Yugoslavia’s willingness to provide your country with security assistance, and pledged support for the development of your agricultural and industrial development. When it counted, when the hardship of sacrifice was upon you, my country delivered; it helped contribute to your historic achievement, thus further cementing our ties.

Starting from that auspicious beginning, our two nations have forged a true friendship—despite the thousands of kilometers that separate us. Let me especially recall, by way of illustration, the important role played by my country in securing the admission of Viet Nam to the United Nations. In 1977, our renowned diplomat, Mr. Lazar Mojsov, was President of the UN General Assembly, and had the honor of declaring Viet Nam the 149^th member of the world organization—the culmination of a sustained campaign on the part of Yugoslavia and several other leading countries of the Non-Aligned Movement.

On that historic day, ambassador Mojsov spoke of the happiness he felt that your country had assumed its rightful and deserved place in the global community of nations. “The admission of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam marks a further step towards consolidating peace and security in the world,” he said. “Unjustly and for too long a time”, he continued, “this courageous and martyred country was unable to join us. Now all that is past and we must turn to the future”, he concluded.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Decades ago, thanks to the leadership of Ho Chi Minh, Viet Nam chose to fix a strategic gaze toward the future. You suffered greatly under succeeding waves of occupation. And out of the ashes of a thirty-year struggle, you re-emerged onto the world stage as a strong regional factor of stability, a leader in economic dynamism, and a pioneer of contemporary poverty reduction policies.

Your courageous people have met adversity with hard work, indomitable spirit and intellectual innovation.

Your commitment to the Non-Aligned Movement, of which my country was a founding member, and your devotion in helping solidify an international system that is based on the founding principles of the United Nations Charter, is well-known and greatly valued.

And your significant contribution to the transformation of Southeast Asia from a war-torn and divided region into one characterized by peaceful cooperation through your active membership in ASEAN, as well as your national example of success in reconstruction, is strongly respected.

In this context, I would like to share with you my favorable impressions of the words of Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dzung, who spoke recently of the global requirement to increase efforts to maintain peace and stability throughout the world; to promote equal, cooperative relations between states, and to ensure an international environment conducive to the secure development of each and every country. I believe that the construction of a future characterized in this way—a world of continuous reform, enhanced social justice and industrial innovation—provides a firm foundation for the sustainable prosperity of the entire planet.

In the 21^st century, the world has become more interdependent, multipolar, and globalized. At the same time, the global community is, worryingly, less coherent, and less predictable. Humankind is therefore presented with a rare opportunity to develop in peace, but at the same time is faced with severe challenges. One such challenge is the evolution of international security issues. As we know well, the dangers posed by conventional military threats have lessened. Yet dangers posed by unconventional ones—such as terrorism, the proliferation of WMD, religious extremism, and ethnic secessionism—have dramatically increased in recent times.

We must work together—developed and developing, North and South, West and East—to ensure a better, cleaner, and more secure world. And we must manage in common the tectonic shifts in the global balance of power that are just around the corner, by rules meant to maintain predictability of action. All other approaches to the future would relegate us to an era of even more unbalanced economic development and dangerous rivalries.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Serbia’s destiny lies in the European Union. The president of our Republic, Mr. Boris Tadic, spoke recently of our willingness to sign the Stabilization and Association Agreement with the European Union immediately—an important step in securing official EU candidate status. Were that to happen, Serbia and all of Southeast Europe would be put back on the EU membership fast-track, deservedly gaining entry into one of the world’s greatest political projects.

Serbia has always been a part of Europe: geographically, historically, and culturally. Today’s Europe has developed into a storehouse of values that creates stability and security in our traditionally divided continent. It has become the antidote to isolation, protectionism, and war. It brings people together, expands markets, and inspires attempts at resolving differences in line with the higher aspirations of humankind, instead of giving in to basest instincts.

Our eventual membership in the European Union will only strengthen our capacity to maintain a foreign policy based on the strict adherence to the founding documents of the international system and the European space—documents such as the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act. The principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity must continue to form the firm foundation of how we relate to one another in the global arena.

I also want to emphasize that our European accession will give a new meaning to Serbia’s bond of friendship with Viet Nam and other Asian countries. Not only will it deepen your access to the common European market, but I firmly believe that it will increase both understanding and cooperation between the EU and ASEAN.

Another key foreign policy priority is promoting friendly, neighbourly relations among all the countries of Southeast Europe.

That is why Serbia has devoted considerable efforts to ensuring that our regional policies reflect our core belief in the importance of promoting common values, mutual understanding, reconciliation, and the sovereign equality of states.

It also forms part of the constellation of reasons why we have become so concerned with recent developments in our southern province of Kosovo, under United Nations administration since June 1999.

Wrong moves have been made, calling into question our ability to continue moving rapidly forward. If care is not taken, if strategic thinking is not employed, the region’s determined path to prosperity could suffer a fatal, generational blow. And if we falter, if we plunge back into a mindset reminiscent of our recent past, there is a real danger that Southeast Europe could return to division and strife.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

When I speak of “wrong moves”, I refer primarily to the support by some in the international community for the unilateral and illegal declaration of independence by Serbia’s southern province of Kosovo, which took place on February 17^th, 2008.

Kosovo for us is not only an integral part of our territory. It is something more: It is a place of tremendous importance for Serbia. Kosovo stands at the crucible of our identity; it is the essential link between our past and our future; it is what ties the living tradition of Serbia to itself today.

But that is not the reason why the recognition by about thirty countries of the attempt by Kosovo’s Albanians to secede from Serbia sets a dangerous precedent for the international system.

If Kosovo does not get resolved on the basis of prudent statecraft and strategic forethought, the world will become much more unstable, and far less predictable.

Let me begin by stating a series of uncontested facts.

In June 1999, the terms of peace imposed by NATO on my country in the wake of its 78-day bombing campaign, explicitly reaffirmed our sovereignty over Kosovo, while giving the United Nations a mandate to administer the province’s internal affairs, as is plain from the text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. This same resolution placed a binding, Chapter VII obligation on all member-states to respect the territorial integrity of my country. In this way, Resolution 1244 added force to the general principle stated in the UN Charter that compels all member-states to respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Resolution 1244 remains in force today, for the Security Council has not replaced it, thanks in part to the support of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. And yet, tragically, it has been violated in a most direct way.

Through the recognition of Kosovo’s declaration of independence, the forcible partition of a UN member-state, the Republic of Serbia, has been supported. For that is precisely what Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence amounts to.

Through the process of recognition, some countries have chosen to become complicit in the radical transformation of the right to self-determination into an avowed right to independence.

Through the act of recognition, ethnic or religious groups with a grievance against their capitals the world over have been supplied with a play book on how to achieve their ends.

In short, through recognition, acquiescence has been given to the legitimization of a paternalistic doctrine of imposing solutions to ethnic conflicts the world over.

Some would reply that Kosovo is a unique case—that the events that led to the NATO bombing have produced an inevitable outcome: the independence of Kosovo.

Let us be very clear on what this proposition actually means. We have been told that Serbia committed uniquely atrocious acts against the Kosovo Albanians. That reconciliation is impossible. That the only way the Kosovo Albanians can be satisfied by granting their maximalist demands. That the time for negotiations has passed. That we have no choice but to accept the imposition of this outcome. That it’s for our own good. That to object means we have not discarded the legacy of Slobodan Milosevic’s atrocities. And that to engage in a diplomatic and political campaign to impede and reverse this direct and unprovoked attack on our sovereignty and the international system could result in the isolation of Serbia.

In effect, we are being told that our right to define what constitutes our national interest—which at the very least includes the preservation of our sovereignty over our entire territory—is of no relevance.

____

I have had many conversations in which I have asked for an explanation as to what is so unique about the Kosovo case. I confronted my interlocutors with the atrocities that took place in Rwanda, or those taking place in Sudan, and asked why they have not advocated the partition of those countries. What was the line that Milosevic stepped over that the leaders of these countries did not?

I have asked that we examine the case of the Kurds in Iraq, who were even gassed by Saddam Hussein in the early 1980s, and who have enjoyed what amounts to de facto independence since the early 1990s. I have asked, ‘why has the partition of Iraq not been imposed?’

Usually I receive no answer. Sometimes I am told that forcibly partitioning Iraq does not advance the stability of the region, and that it is therefore not in the interest of any responsible stakeholder to support it. And so no one has.

Now of course, the Middle East is not Southeast Europe, and Iraq is not Serbia. But the parallels are striking and they deserve our consideration. One cannot simply dismiss out of hand the universal view that it would not be prudent to impose a solution to Iraq or, say, to the Arab-Israeli conflict that has lasted for decades, while saying that it’s perfectly alright to do so in the case of Kosovo’s future status. And to say this after only two brief rounds of negotiations—in which powerful countries had stated at the onset that independence would be imposed if we failed to come to an agreement by an artificial deadline.

Ask yourselves: with a pre-set time limit coupled with a pre-announced outcome that corresponded to their opening, maximalist negotiating position, what incentive did the Kosovo Albanians have to engage in talks that would have required them to compromise from that very position? Why would they not just wait out the clock?

This is exactly what they did.

The Kosovo secessionists were rewarded for their refusal to play by the rules of good-faith negotiations. And this was done absent a serious account by anyone of how imposing a radical solution to an ethnic conflict would advance the consolidation of the European values the entire region has been working hard to embrace. And it was done without any coherent attempt to elucidate how exactly the international system would not be shaken to its very foundation, if Kosovo’s independence were to be confirmed.

For let’s face it: the gross violation of international law that is being attempted has revived the global debate about the legitimacy of internationally recognized borders. This needs to be addressed, not wished away. For there are clearly dozens of Kosovo-s throughout the world, happy that an attempt has been made to legitimize unilateral secession in the international system.

The dangers for the peaceful development of many parts of the world—Southeast Asia included—could not be more apparent. Think of the use that separatists in Aceh and Papua could make of the Kosovo precedent—as well as those in the Philippines, Thailand or Sri Lanka.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This danger of which I have spoken is very real, and very worrisome.

The only way to circumvent the disaster is to re-start negotiations on a compromise, mutually-acceptable solution to our province’s future status.

There is no other option than to return to the negotiating table. This will not be easy. But the alternative is for Kosovo to remain an entity-in-limbo unattractive to foreign investment, unresponsive to the rule of law, and unable to control its freefall to failure.

We are ready, at any time, and in any place, to engage in talks with the authorities in Pristina under the auspices of the United Nations.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We cannot acquiesce to a unilateral declaration of independence. Were we to give our consent—were we even to imply the acceptance of an imposed outcome by a constellation of powers stronger than we—we would become complicit in posing a fundamental threat to our own democratic development, and the European future of Southeast Europe.

This we cannot do. Such a concession we can never make. That responsibility to our country, and to the global order, we will on no account renounce.

Kosovo shall remain a part of Serbia forever.

____

Let me conclude on a personal note. When I was in school, I learned about the struggle of the Vietnamese people, about Ho Chi Minh, and about the millions who performed the ultimate sacrifice so that future generations could live in peace and prosperity. And I learned about Mrs. Nguyen Thi Binh, about her almost legendary exploits in the south, and about her efforts to reunify your homeland. And then one day she came to Belgrade. The year was 1989.

I vividly recall watching the television coverage of her visit. I recollect her graceful demeanor, and her message of peaceful development and self-reliance. I remember feeling honored that she had come to my country.

My memories of that visit have reached back across almost twenty years of time to set the tone of this, long in coming, visit by a foreign minister of Serbia to Viet Nam.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Viet Nam’s track record in overcoming tremendous challenges assures that you will continue succeeding—with quiet pride and strength of purpose so characteristic of the great peoples of this region.

Viet Nam’s struggle for basic dignity and justice, for the right to determine one’s own destiny, and for the benefits of peace to extend to your shores, requires universal respect.

Serbia on this day reaffirms it. We reiterate our friendship with you. And we reconfirm our dedication to strengthen the international system on the basis of the principles contained in the United Nations Charter, joining with your country and all others that share our vision of a world in which equality and justice, peaceful cooperation, and sustained development, reigns supreme. This is a great task, and it will require much effort. But it is by all means possible, as we recall the wisdom of the traditional Vietnamese proverb: “many hands make light work.”

Thank you for your attention. I stand ready to take your questions.

Mr. President, thank you for convening this session of the Security Council.

Excellencies, once again, we are gathered to discuss troubling developments in Serbia’s southern province of Kosovo and Metohija, under the administration of the United Nations since June 1999.

And once again we are compelled to discuss the dangerous consequences of the unilateral, illegal and illegitimate declaration of independence by Kosovo’s Provisional Institutions of Self-Government—which took place on February 17^th of this year.

By doing so, a direct assault on the innate operating logic of the international system has been committed.

For Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) places a binding, Chapter VII obligation on all member-states to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Serbia.

Those twenty-something countries that furthered the secessionist cause of the Kosovo Albanians have contributed to making the international system more unstable, more insecure, and more unpredictable.

Recognizing the unilateral declaration of Kosovo’s independence from Serbia legitimizes the doctrine of imposing solutions to ethnic conflicts. It legitimizes the act of unilateral secession by a provincial or other non-state actor. It transforms the right to self-determination into an avowed right to independence. It legitimizes the forced partition of internationally-recognized, sovereign states. And it supplies any ethnic or religious group with a grievance against its capital with a play book on how to achieve their ends.

I want to be very clear. We will never recognize the attempt by the authorities in Pristina to unilaterally secede from Serbia. We call upon the countries that have recognized to reconsider, and we call on those that have not to stay the course, to help us continue to defend the international system from being fundamentally undermined.

Mr. President,

Excellencies,

Let us ask ourselves with a frankness that we owe to those most directly affected by this perilous precedent, but also with an eye to those who could be in the time to come,

• Have the principles of international relations been advanced by wrenching Kosovo away from a democratically governed country?

• Will the province of Kosovo, as an entity-in-limbo that cannot acquire international legitimacy arising out of membership in the United Nations, be able to achieve sustainable prosperity without Belgrade?

• And has regional stability and cooperation been increased by the perverse choice our neighbors are being forced to make—to choose between Serbia and Kosovo?

Mr. President,

Since February 17^th, the situation on the ground has been deteriorating, thus making it more difficult to control.

This is not where we should be.

Understandably, Mr. President, the public reaction in Serbia to Pristina’s UDI has been clear and loud.

For the vast majority of Serbs, it has been a dignified reaction. Hundreds of thousands assembled in Belgrade on February 21^st to express their sorrow peacefully, and to do so in worship. Young and old, rich and poor, they came from all corners of Serbia to demonstrate their opposition to the forcible partition of their country.

It is tragic that a small proportion of those who gathered in Belgrade on that day turned to violence. The assault on foreign embassies, downtown stores, and government buildings was as unacceptable as it was deplorable.

Allow me to extend, on behalf of my Government, my unreserved regrets to those countries whose embassies were damaged. You have our assurances that all measures have been taken to ensure that something like this does not happen again.

Violence is not the answer. Not in Belgrade, not in Mitrovica, not in Pristina. Nowhere in Serbia is violence the answer.

____

But violence has been a reality for too long in our southern province. Mr. President. That which took place under a dictatorship in the 1990s was terrible and should never be disparaged.

And yet, I remind this Council that our Serbian collective experience has been marked by the memory of what happened in the period after June 1999. In peacetime, with the United Nations present, hundreds of thousands of Serbs were expelled from Kosovo. Tens of thousands of Serbian homes were torched to the ground. Thousands of Serbs were murdered or are missing and presumed dead. And more than 150 Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries were destroyed.

The province’s Serbs were abandoned to carefully orchestrated and brutally executed pogroms by the Kosovo Albanians—who have been rewarded for their violent conduct.

Mr. President,

The Republic of Serbia will not accept the imposition of an outcome that fundamentally violates our legitimate national interests.

So long as these attempts by some to exclude us continue, we will keep coming back to this body and to all others; and will employ all legal, diplomatic and political means at our disposal to continue asserting our core sovereign rights.

By the same token, I underline to the Council Serbia’s preparedness to move constructively forward. We must overcome the danger of imposing realities that have no legal basis. For such attempts only create defensive, self-preservationist moves that drive us further apart.

We must start talking honestly to one another: to assess the decisions that have been taken, the mistakes that have been made, the threats that have arisen, and the accommodations that must be made.

We must meet and reason together. And we must work in concert to instill the confidence necessary for all the Western Balkans to once again take bold, historic steps to a common, European future.

For I believe that none of us can afford any more missed opportunities to build trust, to seek agreement, to consolidate values, and to arrive at a just, mutually-acceptable solution that benefits us all.

The alternative to handling this issue with great care and reverence for the UN Charter, with great respect for the reputation and legacy of UN peacekeeping, and with great concern for the credibility of the Secretary-General, is simply too bleak to fathom.

In short, what we must do is to turn our minds from wondering what will happen next, to making us wonder at what we can still accomplish.

Mr. President,

I would like to emphasize that Serbia wishes no ill to the ethnic Albanians in our southern province. We continue to take seriously their right to obtain substantial self-governance while remaining under a common sovereign roof with Serbia.

It is in our vital interest that all of Kosovo’s communities prosper—and prosper together in peace, security and reconciliation as neighbors in a progressive society of hope and forgiveness.

This is why Serbia does not intent to impose an embargo, and why we have a clear policy of not resorting to the force of arms.

At the same time, we will continue ensuring that the Serbs of Kosovo do not remain relegated to a fearful life of ghettoized isolation, as they have been for the last eight years. We will ensure that their future is based on tangible assurance, rather than vague promises and unlawful jurisdictions.

Mr. President,

Resolution 1244 must be observed in full. This is the only way to prevent a further deterioration of the situation on the ground. There must be no erosion of UNMIK’s clearly defined mandate by the Security Council. Therefore, we strongly demand that no further transfer of competencies from UNMIK to any other body take place.

This is of vital importance.

Let me assure you that the Republic of Serbia will continue to comply with 1244. Unfortunately, others have taken the divisive step of making their own interpretation to suit some short-sighted purposes.

It is a great pity that some European countries have joined in this dubious exercise. First by recognizing the unilateral declaration of independence by the authorities in Pristina, thereby gravely setting back the region’s European prospects. And then by establishing EULEX and the affiliated International Steering Group of countries.

Both EULEX and the ISG have set for themselves the goal of assisting in the implementation of the Comprehensive Proposal for Kosovo Status Settlement—the so-called Ahtisaari Proposal. But the Proposal has never been endorsed by the Security Council—the only institution endowed with the power to legitimate changes in the nature of the international presence in Kosovo.

It is therefore the basic position of the Republic of Serbia that both EULEX and the ISG operate well outside the parameters set forth by Resolution 1244—and that their activities are strongly inconsistent with the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Helsinki Final Act.

Let me be clear: It is not that the EU is unwelcome in our southern province. For we do welcome, as a matter of principle, any demonstration of Europe’s deepening commitment to our country, including Kosovo.

But there has to be a clear legal mandate for any such commitment—and this can only be achieved by getting the approval of the Security Council. We must work together to overcome this problem within this very forum.

Excellencies,

President Boris Tadic spoke a few days ago of our willingness to sign the Stabilization and Association Agreement with the European Union immediately. Despite our present troubles, I wish to reaffirm this principled position—one which a solid majority of my countrymen share.

Our heritage, our culture, our beliefs, and our history are profoundly European. Europe has developed into a storehouse of values that creates stability and security in our historically divided continent. It has become the antidote to isolation, protectionism, fear, extremism, and war. It brings people together, expands markets, points to a more prosperous tomorrow, solidifies the gains made, and inspires attempts at resolving differences in line with the higher aspirations of humankind, instead of giving in to basest instincts.

To construct and to integrate, and so to grasp the infinite opportunities that the 21^st century offers to the bold and to the visionary. That is the kind of Europe to which we are committed, and to which we hope to belong.

Regrettably, we have come to the chasm. Let us now try to join together in order to build a bridge over it. To look beyond the immediate divide, and to secure a future in Europe for the entire region.

Mr. President,

The Republic of Serbia stands ready to be a constructive partner in the achievement of regional peace, stability, and reconciliation. We are committed to open dialogue and good-faith negotiation with all. And we continue to be faithful to the principles of international law.

The Republic of Serbia is ready. We are ready to host a series of meetings with UNMIK on a whole host of issues, such as the status of the Kosovo Serb population and that of the Serbian Orthodox Church, as well as the question of customs points, and the status of Kosovo Serb judges and policemen in our southern province, as well as on all others.

We have to solve concrete problems. We have to address the real life concerns of the province’s most vulnerable. And we have to pay attention to the human cost of our actions.

For every day that goes by without working towards some sort of agreement creates unsustainable hopes, irrational fears, and dangerous, uncoordinated outcomes on the ground.

Let me repeat Serbia’s principled, deeply-held position that regional peace and security can be consolidated through dialogue, not imposition; through agreement, not compulsion; and through law, not might.

Mr. President,

Tomorrow is the fifth anniversary of the tragic assassination of Serbia’s first democratically-elected prime minister, Dr. Zoran Djindjic.

He was the engine of our democratic success, and the visionary of our place in Europe.

A month before he was murdered, Dr. Djindjic wrote a series of letters to world leaders on the question of Kosovo’s future status in Serbia and Serbia’s future status in Europe. He wrote of his vision of a Serbia as proud of its European future as it is proud of its national past. He wrote about the importance of preserving our identity while broadening its scope. And he wrote that—quote—the worst option is for things to happen in Kosovo without our participation, and without our objective responsibility—end quote.

Well, the worst option, as Djindjic called it, has been attempted by people who should have known better. These outside actors chose to sacrifice regional geo-strategic priorities on the altar of the extremist communal aspirations of the Kosovo Albanians. And they chose expediency over statecraft.

The international system wobbles precariously as a result.

But it can be steadied. By acting together, I believe we can overcome our differences on Kosovo in the weeks and months ahead.

Mr. President,

Elections will take place in Serbia in May. The result will be a turning point for my country, and for all the Western Balkans.

For it will be a time of great decision.

Real, concrete differences exist on economic and social issues, and on the crucial issue of Serbia’s future in Europe.

Each citizen of Serbia will be called on to make a clear and compelling choice.

But let me be clear on what this election will not be about.

It will not be about Serbia’s policy towards its breakaway province of Kosovo and Metohija.

Make no mistake, on this fundamental issue—on this question that concerns the very nature of the identity of our nation—there is no disagreement in Serbia. My country is strongly united on Kosovo. And we will always remain so.

We will continue defending our sovereignty and territorial integrity.

We will remain steadfast in our determination to help our brethren overcome their present discontent.

And we will build on our unity forged by Kosovo to preserve a democratic Serbia that is whole and free, and comprehensively engaged with a world community strengthened by the reaffirmation of the legitimacy of the international system.

Kosovo shall remain a part of Serbia forever.

____

Thank you, Mr. President, for having given me the opportunity to address this Council at a time of great consequence for us all.