Statement by Mr. Vladimir Safronkov, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, at the Security Council on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina
We listened very carefully to the briefing by the High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr. Valentin Inzko. We also thoroughly reviewed his report (S/2017/379, annex) and must say once again, as was the case on other occasions, that the document does not provide an objective narrative of the country. It is a one-sided account with politicized assessments. We call upon Mr. Inzko to change his credo and to stop blaming the Bosnian Serbs — and recently Croats — for all the difficulties. Instead, he must focus on moving towards dialogue based on mutual respect that takes into account the needs and concerns of all.
In the course of recent months, the internal political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina deteriorated and culminated in a very deep constitutional crisis at the end of February. That resulted from the attempts of politicians in Sarajevo to carry out a review of the 2007 verdict of the International Court of Justice in the case Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro. We would like to underscore that these steps bypassed the Presidency as well as other pan-Bosnian structures, thereby undermining their efficiency and authority. This represents a very alarming trend in the political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
This is weakening the trend of having a mutually respectful dialogue, compromise and consensus among all constituent entities on all theimportant issues. Let us not forget that this principle forms the letter and the spirit of the Dayton Agreement. It is the basis and the foundation of national reconciliation, as well as a gauge and a guarantee of stability and security in the country and in the region as a whole.
In the meantime, the Dayton Agreement and its key basic principles are being attacked; this did not begin just recently. Let us recall the situation that prevailed in the summer of 2016, when the results of the census were announced and the well-founded objections of Bosnian Serbs were ignored. Let us also recall the trials and tribulations surrounding the ruling of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina that it was unlawful to celebrate Republika Srpska Day on 9 January. This one-sided, politicized decision compelled the Bosnian Serb authorities to resort to the highest form of democracy: the free expression of the will of citizens. The recommendational nature of the results of the referendum was underscored in the recent Republic Srpska report to the Secretary-General.
As a result, the decision was made to introduce changes into the law on Republika Srpska’s main holiday. This decision was not questioned. We did not agree with the statement that celebrating Republika Srpska Day had caused the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina or the Republika Srpska to deteriorate. This is not borne out by the facts, and there have been no negative consequences. The conclusions reached about the concerns of the Bosniaks who live in Republika Srpska, including refugees, are simply made up and have nothing to do with reality.
The situation in Republika Srpska can be characterized as stable and sustainable, including in Srebrenica, to which special attention is being paid by the international community. There is no justification, therefore, for the one-sided sanctions introduced last year by the former United States Administration against Republika Srpska. This decision needs to be rescinded.
Unfortunately, we cannot speak of stability and sustainability in connection with Bosnian institutions and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In addition to the provocative attempt to review the decision of the International Court of Justice, it is also dangerous that a number of leaders are not ready to agree on key issues relating to equality for the representatives of all ethnicities in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Chronic issues are facing Mostar, where elections have not been held since 2008, and the implementation of the European Court of Human Rights ruling on Sejdić and Finci. In addition, the issue of introducing changes to the electoral law relating to legislative elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina is problematic. We are convinced, and let me underscore this point once again, that the electoral law must reflect the interests of all three constituent entities of the country, which is the basic philosophy of Dayton. The key to contemporary political issues in Bosnia and Herzegovina lies in the fact that the level of inter-ethnic trust is low, a trend to which we need to pay special attention, as does the High Representative, because he represents the entire international community, not just a part of it.
We need to stop appointing guilty parties. Once again we need to work on promoting dialogue. We must stop telling untruthful stories about separatist tendencies in Banja Luka and inventing negative trends with respect to Republika Srpska. The President of Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik, in his most recent report to the Secretary-General, countered all such accusations. It would be useful to cite excerpts from this official document in the report of the High Representative.
Given the current political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, we see no danger to regional stability. However, the evolution of some processes following a negative scenario with the involvement of external forces, including extremist andterrorist forces, could make the situation into a source of concern. Unfortunately, the High Representative has paid minimal attention to the important topic of the spread of extremist religious teachings in Bosnia and Herzegovina. But this is something that exists, and the international community must monitor the situation very closely.
The quality and depth of the analysis contained in the High Representative’s report leaves a lot to be desired. Once again, we see a biased attitude towards Serbs, as well as unacceptable comparisons and historic parallels, for which the High Representative will have to apologize later. Mr. Inzko spent more than a decade in the region, so he should not make those kinds of allegations. It is not entirely clear from the report how exactly the High Representative is helping in the implementation in Bosnia and Herzegovina of the 5+2 agenda, on the drawdown of the Office of the High Representative. There has been no progress in that respect; the spectrum of preconditions and criteria is so wide that we cannot count in its implementation happening anytime soon. Instead, Mr. Inzko is very fond of promoting the Euro-Atlantic agenda. This is not his mandate. He is a representative of the entire international community in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
In the current conditions, we see no added value in the remaining elements of the international presence in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We support the closing of the Office of the High Representative drawing down his the Bonn powers as quickly as possible, because they have outlived their usefulness, as have the protectorate methods. They do not help national reconciliation but impede the harmonious development of the country as a whole.
Russia, as one of the guarantors of the Dayton Peace Agreement will continue firmly promoting the stabilization process in Bosnia and Herzegovina, abiding very strictly by the Dayton Agreement. It is unacceptable to try to review its principles, which are enshrined in Security Council resolutions. We are committed to transferring full responsibility for the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina to Bosnians themselves. All changes must come about as a result of a conscious choice by the Bosnian side and be carried out strictly in line with the consensus provided for in the Dayton agreement.
We are interested in the development of a mutually beneficial cooperation in Bosnia and its entities and ensuring that there is true equality for all three constituent entities in the country.
