Zivadin Jovanovic, Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals

Published on March 25th, 2013.

1. Please give us some information about yourself, your career?

ZJ: Graduate of Law, Faculty of Law, Belgrade University (1961); District Administration of New Belgrade (1961 – 1964); Diplomatic service of the SFRY/FRY (1964 – 2000); Ambassador in Luanda, Angola (1988 – 1993). Assistant FA Minister (1995 – 1998), Federal FA Minister (1988 – 2000); Vice Chairman of the Socialist Party of Serbia for FA (1996 – 2002); MP, to the Parliament of Serbia (1996), to the Federal Parliament of Yugoslavia (2000). Books: “The Bridges” (2002), “Abolishing the State” (2003), “The Kosovo Mirror” (2006).

2. After leaving the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in November 2000 you joined the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals. Now you are the Chairman of this Association. Tel us what are your priorities?

ZJ: Forum`s priorities are: promotion of peace, tolerance and cooperation based on equality among individuals, nations, and states. We stand for full respect of the international law, basic principles of international relations and the role of United Nations. Use or threats of use of force, military aggressions are not admissible means in solving international problems. We consider that there are no “humanitarian” wars, or interventions. All interventions beginning with NATO aggression against Serbia (FRY) in 1999 up to now, regardless on their formal, public explanations, have been wars of conquest, some of them for geo-strategic, some for economic benefits. We promote human rights in their entirety, according UN GS Declaration – including social, economic, cultural, health, employment and other human rights.
We try to meet our objectives through various public debates, conferences, round tables, seminars, on national and international levels. Forum cooperates with associations of similar aims, within Serbia, the region and worldwide.

3. We have seen some of very interesting books published by Belgrade Forum. How do you manage to maintain your publishing activity?

ZJ: Forum has published about 70 books on different national and international issues, from development policy in conditions of crisis, Status of Kosovo and Metohija and the Hague Tribunal to the NATO policy in the Balkans, Foreign policy of Serbia, International Terrorism and the Role of Intellectuals. Some of our books have been distributed in many countries in all continents. This is the case, for example, of the book titled “NATO Aggression - the Twilight of the West”. Unfortunately, for the lack of resources, only a few of our books have been published in foreign languages.
Last month, only, we published three new books – one devoted to the great Serbian philosopher academician Mihailo Markovic, who was one of the co-founders of Belgrade Forum, the other titled “From Nuremberg to Hague” and third “From Aggression to Secession”. Promotions of our books in various towns in Serbia attract significant attention.
All our activities, including writing and publishing, are entirely based on voluntary work. We never had, nor do we have today, a single person paid for the work done within the Forum. Membership fees and donations, mainly, from Serbian Diaspora, are chief sources of Forum`s income.

4. You have mentioned promotion of peace to be one of your key objectives. But peoples of your region have been victims of wars in the last decade of 20-th century?

ZJ: True. The peoples of former Yugoslavia have suffered immensely first, from the civil wars in Bosnia and Croatia (1992 – 1995), then from the military aggression of NATO (1999), from sanctions and isolation and so on. Great many of them continue to suffer today. Consider, for example, the life of close to half a million of refugees and displaced persons living in Serbia only, who are not permitted to return to their homes in Croatia, or in Kosovo and Metohija. Consequences are still painful and will continue long in the future. What to say of the consequences of cassette bombs and missiles with depleted uranium used by NATO in 1999 taking daily tolls in human lives today and in centuries to come. History will proove that the peoples of former Yugoslavia have been victims of the concept of so called New World Order which in fact has been based on the policy of domination and exploitation.

5. Do you suggest that the foreign factors are responsible for brake-up of Yugoslavia, and not local?

ZJ: Local factors cannot be amnestied; they do bear their responsibility, of course for not being prepared to compromise. But, prevailing analyses seem to be lacking due attention to the negative role of external factors. Now we have enough proofs that certain European powers already in 1976 and 1977 had plans how to “rearrange” the territory of SFRY, in other words, how to divide, or fragment it in order to suit their own interests.
After Tito`s death, nationalism and separatism in various Yugoslav republics, as well as separatism and terrorism in the Serbian Province of Kosovo and Metohija, had been encouraged, even assisted politically, financially, logistically and propaganda-wise. Later on, certain mighty countries have been involved in the civil wars helping one, against the other, side. Those countries almost openly had been supporting secession of Slovenia and Croatia, arming Croatia and Bosnia even during UN arms embargo, encouraging and facilitating incoming of mercenaries, including Mujahidin. On the other side Serbia and Montenegro had been under isolation, sanctions and stigmatization. They had been treated as the only ones responsible for the civil wars. That was not based on facts, nor helpful in extinguishing the fire.
Results?
In the place of one state, now there are six, economically unsustainable, puppet states, plus seventh one in the offing, 18 governments , six armies, six diplomatic services, etc. Foreign debt which in 1990 for the whole of SFRY amounted to about 13.5 billion rose in 2012 to about 200 billion of euro for the six former Yugoslav republics! Some of them became financially enslaved. Who has benefited from this? Until 1990 there was not a single foreign military basis in the region. Today there is u number of foreign, mainly USA, bases, Bondstil in Kosovo and Metohija being the largest in Europe . To do what, to benefit whom? Bosnia almost 18 years after Dayton Accords is not functional; FYROM ten years after Ohrid Accords is not functional, continues to be faced with profound ethnic divisions and tensions. Status of Kosovo and Metohija even14 years after UN SC resolution 1244, still remains unresolved. Tirana`s Sali Brisha and Prishtina`s Hashim Tachi are publically advocating for establishment of so called Greater Albania. Other burning problems like unemployment ranging from 30 to 70 per cent, poverty, hundreds of thousands of refugees and displaced persons, international organized crime, including trafficking of human organs, drugs, arms and immigrants, make the picture of post Yugoslavia`s reality grim and uncertain.
So, who has really benefited from fragmentation Yugoslavia?

6. Mentioning NATO intervention what are your views now, 14 years after?

ZJ: My views have not changed. This was illegal, criminal and immoral attack on a sovereign European state. Illegal because it violated all basic principles of International Law, including UN Charter, Helsinki Final Act and many international Conventions. It was undertaken without permission of UN Security Council. Criminal, because it was directed mainly against civilians, civilian infrastructure, using forbidden armament such as chemical, cassette bombs and missiles with depleted uranium. Immoral because it was based on false pretentions and untruths. Leaders of NATO are responsible first of all for killing of close to 4.000 and for wounding about 10.000 of persons, two thirds of whom were civilians. Direct material damages amounted to over 100 billion of US dollars. NATO aggression solved nothing, but it has provoked many new problems. It was war of conquest and not “humanitarian intervention”.

7. Can you be more specific?

ZJ: I have already mentioned some direct consequences. In a broader sense it should be noted that NATO aggression marked strategic change in its nature: it abandoned defensive and adopted offensive (aggressive) policy self authorizing itself to intervene any time, any spot on the globe. UN, especially, UN Security Council, had been disabled; international law and justice disregarded.
This was long prepared first war on Europe`s soil after the Second World War. It was demonstration of US domination in Europe, expansion toward East, justification of spending on NATO even after dissolution Warsaw Pact, precedent for future interventions (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya).
It was the war imposed and directed by non-European power with the consequences to stay on Europe`s soil for a long time.
Aggression had marked strategic change in Germany`s policy adopted after Second World War. Taking active part in NATO`s aggression against Serbia (FRY) Germany deviated from own constitution and widely opened the door for combat roles away from its territory, and for militarization.
Today we have on European soil more military basis than at the peak of Cold War. Mushrooming of military basis started after NATO aggression on Serbia (FRY). How to explain expansion of democracy all over the Continent and proliferation of military bases at the same time? I have not heard convincing explanation. Something seems to be wrong.

8. And what is your opinion on the future of Bosnia?

ZJ: Bosnia and Herzegovina had existed as one of the six republics of SFRY based on constituent equality of three peoples each having a right of veto – Muslims, Serbs and Croats. In that regard, it was considered being “small Yugoslavia”. When in 1992 constitutional principle of consensus was violated in the way that Muslims and Croats declared for secession ignoring Serb`s option to stay within Yugoslavia, civil war erupted. The Dayton peace Accords were success only because they reaffirmed the principle of equality of the three constituent peoples, equality of two entities (Moslem-Croat Federation and Republica Srbska) and principle of consensus. These basic principles were enshrined in the Constitution which makes integral part of the Accords.
The main source of the current crisis is the ambition of the Moslem leaders in Sarajevo to abolish the principle of consensus and to make a unitary state under their domination. In addition, they would like also to change the division of the territory guaranteed by Dayton Accords according to which Muslim-Croat Federation controls 51 and Republic of Srpska 49 percent of the whole territory. To make the problem more difficult, Muslims for their claims which obviously are contrary to Dayton stipulations, continue to enjoy support, from some power centers, primarily from Washington and Berlin. Why they want to further weaken Republic of Srpska and strengthen Moslems, I would rather not comment. These centers even pressurize Serbia`s leaders to discipline the leaders in Banja Luka so that they accept revision of Dayton and Constitution contrary to their interests which are internationally guaranteed. Serbia as guarantor of the Dayton Accords, firstly, has no power to impose anything on the leadership of Republic of Srpska and, secondly, it is not in Serbia`s interest to weaken Republic of Srpska thus provoking internal tensions and renewed spiral of ethnic tensions and even clashes in own neighborhood.
I believe that Bosnia and Herzegovina should be left alone to politically find solutions that suite the interests of the three equal constituent peoples and two equal entities. The Dayton Accords are not perfect. But, there could hardly be better compromise then Dayton Accords. Brussels claims that centralization of power in Sarajevo would apparently upgrade efficiency of the state administration. Authors of this view seems to be disregarding that it is the principle of consensus and decentralization which led to reestablishing of peace, maintaining of integrity and providing the sense of freedom and democracy. Finally, in my opinion, the Office of High Representative after 17 years of being at the same time Law making, Prosecution and Judiciary has become anachronism and should be disbanded. Bosnia and Herzegovina is the only member of UN (even member of Security Council), OSCE and other organizations, where High Representative enacts laws, removes presidents, prime ministers, ministers!
Serbia, being small, peace loving country, having neither imperial history nor imperial ambitions today, in our opinion, should remain neutral country, something like Switzerland. Concerning human rights, we stand for the concept of UN Universal Declaration on Human rights (1948) which demands respect of all human rights including cooperate

9. My colleague of CC once said that Serbia is a thorn in the conscious of Western world. What is your opinion on this?

ZJ: What I can say is that leaders and politicians of certain European countries have been far from neutral, constructive or moral during Yugoslav and Kosovo crisis. Some of them actively advocated and participated in NATO aggression which left long term serious problems for the whole of Europe. Together with leaders of USA, they at least knew about financing, training and arming Albanian terrorists and separatists in Kosovo and Metohija from their states. UN SC documents confirm this . I may not be quite objective, but I am certainly sincere. In my opinion, there is little to be proud of Europe`s role toward Serbia and Serbs in the last 20 years. I have been surprised by the measure of distortions, double standards, immoral statements practiced by certain politicians who represent European values and civilization. And it would not be worth talking about it today, if the lessons have been drawn from the past. Unfortunately, new politicians of those countries continue same policies and same dishonest methods toward Serbia.
Governments of leading western countries initiated outrageous anti-Serbian propaganda campaign based on prejudices, dishonest fabrications and even on ordinary lies. I still remember, for example, invention of German Defense minister Rudolf Sharping of the alleged “Horse shoe plan” . So called “massacre of civilians” in Rachak which served as a justification for the start of military aggression also proved to be false. Report of the findings of the international forensic experts team headed by Finish doctor Helen Ranta, which acted under EU auspices, has never been published. Apparently, it was lost somewhere in Brussels!

10. What are the lessons of the NATO aggression for you and the world?

ZJ: NATO aggression against Serbia (FRY) in 1999 was a model of new wars of conquest covered by the phrase “humanitarian intervention”. Everybody by now should know that this was not “humanitarian intervention” and that there are no “humanitarian wars”. That was a war of conquest, to take away from Serbia its province of Kosovo and Metohija and to install there USA troops for strategic reasons. This was precedent which was followed To my opinion export capitalistic social system based on single Washington’s doctrine is equally unacceptable today as was unacceptable export of socialist system based on Moscow`s doctrine in sixties of the last century. Freedom of choice should be sovereign right of every country. It is not right to divide peoples as if some have right granted to them by Good to decide on what is good even for every other nation in the world. History has thought, at least us in Europe that such ideology would be source of great danger.

11. Where is the solution for the Kosovo issue?

ZJ: Problems of Kosovo and Metohija are centuries long, deep rooted ones. The Province is the birth place of Serbian state, culture, religion, national identity. About 1.300 medieval monasteries and churches, including some UNESCO proclaimed as world heritage, are still found there. Over 150 have been destroyed by vandals and extremists. To say that basic problems there have been in the field of human rights of Albanians would be simplification. To solve the essential problems which, I believe, are in territorial expansionism of Albanians supported by western countries, primarily by USA, Germany and Great Britain, all political actors need wisdom, long term view and patience. Qualities that seem to be astonishingly in deficit.
I still believe in compromise solution based on UN SC resolution 1244 of June 10th, 1999. That resolution, like a number of other UN SC decisions preceding it, has repeatedly guaranteed sovereignty and territorial integrity of FRY (succeed by Serbia) and substantial autonomy for Kosovo and Metohija within FRY (Serbia). In the meantime great many serious mistakes have been committed, first and foremost, by so called international community, including EU, then by Serbian authorities. Those mistakes generally can be summed up as serious deviation from the UN SC resolution 1244. In March 2008, Albanian leadership in Prishtina, declared illegal, unilateral secession of the Province from Serbia proclaiming so called Republic of Kosovo. While the Province even today remains under UN Security Council mandate, UN has not reacted. USA, Germany, Turkey, Great Britain almost immediately recognized this secession. By now, 22 out of 27 EU members followed the suite. Serbia has not, and I believe, shall not recognize secession of 17 percent of its territory.. Most of the UN members, including two, out of five, permanent members of Security Concil, Russia and China, have not.
Last year the dialog has started under the EU auspices between representatives of Belgrade and Prishtina on solving some concrete issues concerning everyday life of citizens. This may be good presuming it does not prejudice the key issue – status of the Province as envisaged by UN SC resolution 1244. I personally would like to see that the dialog produces the time table for free and safe return to their homes of about 250.000 Serbs and other non-Albanians who live in miserable conditions in various towns of Serbia and Montenegro. Unfortunately, so far, this issue has not come to the agenda, partially because of the lack of interest of Prishtina, partially because of the double standard policy of the West.
There is no viable solution imposed by force, or blackmailing Serbia`s government. The so called deal sponsored by certain western countries - territory (Kosovo) for membership (of Serbia) in EU and more foreign investments, seemingly logic considering Serbia`s economy in shambles, but I do not believe it would work. It would not be fair, not balanced. It would not be acceptable by Serbs knowing their history, culture and pride.

12. What is the relationship between Serbia and the EU?

ZJ: EU is traditionally the most important economic partner of Serbia. Historic, social and cultural links remain strong. Hundreds of thousands of Serbian citizens, and their descendants work and live in EU member countries. Serbia is candidate for membership in EU. This is reflected in applying method of “stick and carrots”, in endless list of conditions towards Serbia which have not been applied, nor they are applied now to any other candidate country. EU expects Serbia to “normalize relations with Kosovo”. When Belgrade reacts that it will never recognize Ksovo, Brussels` commissars react that this is “not yet on the agenda”, that EU demands “only” IBM (Integrated Boarder Monitoring) system on the borders with Kosovo, dissolution of Serbia`s institutions in Kosovo, notably in Northern Kosovo, signing of an agreement on good neighborly relations, exchange of ambassadors, then that Serbia does not obstruct Kosovo`s membership in the UN, and alike! Imagine that quantity of hypocrisy. They do not demand diplomatic note, or any written statement on recognition, but they certainly demand relations equaling between sovereign states!
I support close cooperation between Serbia and EU in all fields of mutual interest without any obstacles: free flow of goods, capital, people, information. Having regard that EU at present does not treat Serbia as sovereign partner, Serbia should adopt policy of good neighborly relations with EU and freeze present policy defining membership in the EU as the only alternative. It cannot be in the best interest of Serbia to give away more for less. Openness, cooperation without any administrative obstacles and good neighborly relation between Serbia and EU would be quite reasonable approach for the foreseeable future.

13. How can we in Germany, Switzerland and other European countries help that your people are better in every way?

ZJ: The best way to help not Serbia only, but understanding in Europe and return to real values of our civilization, is to always defend the truth, avert distortion, semi-truths, immorality of all kinds. Serbia and Serbian nation have always through history been part and parcel of Europe, its culture, progress and civilization; this is same today and, I believe, it will stay so in the future. Nations have deep roots and faces which do not change overnight. In my opinion it would be useful if any prejudicing and one sided views characteristic of the public approaches to Serbia and Serbs in the recent past, would be replaced by more balanced and non biased views.

14. We understand that the Belgrade Forum will be hosting important international conference next March in Belgrade?

ZJ: Forum and some other independent, non partisan association in Serbia are planning international conference under title “Aggressions, militarization and world crises”, to be held in Belgrade, March 22 and 23rd, 2013. This conference and other accompanying events will mark 15th Anniversary of the beginning of 1999 NATO aggression against Serbia (FRY) and pay honor to the victims of the aggression. We plan to invite prominent scholars and intellectuals from European and other countries to address the burning issues of military interventionism, expansion of military budgets, militarization of political decision making and world crisis which, in our opinion is not only financial and economic, but also crisis of international world order.