VZCZCXRO0158
PP RUEHIK RUEHPOD RUEHTRO RUEHYG
DE RUCNDT #0155/01 0470005
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 160005Z FEB 08
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3764
INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHBW/AMEMBASSY BELGRADE PRIORITY 0233
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 1148
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 1494
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE PRIORITY 1672
RUEHPS/USOFFICE PRISTINA PRIORITY 1148

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 USUN NEW YORK 000155 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL UNSC UNMIK
SUBJECT: FM JEREMIC ARGUES BEFORE 76 UN MEMBER STATES THAT 
KOSOVO DI WILL SET GLOBAL PRECEDENT 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary. The Security Council met in a private 
session on February 14 at the request of Russia and Serbia to 
discuss Kosovo. Sixty-one non-Council members attended as 
observers.  Serbian FM Jeremic, after failing in a 
last-minute attempt to convince the U.S. to agree to televise 
the session, delivered a strong statement calling on the 
Council, the Secretary-General and SRSG Rucker to denounce an 
expected declaration of independence (DI) by the PISG, saying 
that: 1) the Security Council should act urgently to condemn 
this intention of the Kosovars to carry out a DI; 2) Rucker 
should receive clear instructions to use his reserve powers 
in the Constitutional framework of the PISG to nullify a DI 
and that he should also dissolve the Kosovo Assembly for 
violating UNSCR 1244; 3) and that KFOR should continue to 
remain status neutral.  Speaking immediately after Jeremic 
made his emotional appeal, Russian Permrep Churkin detailed a 
dozen supporting legal references.  In a rebuttal, a much 
more combative Jeremic took strong exception to the positive 
comments of several members to the Ahtisaari Plan, asking 
"what besides might will force implementation" of the 
Ahtisaari plan after it was not adopted by the Council?  The 
US, UK, France, Italy, Belgium and Croatia all conveyed the 
message that the Security Council is blocked and that it is 
time to pursue other options.  End Summary. 
 
JEREMIC MAKES DRAMATIC APPEAL AGAINST DI 
 
¶2. (SBU) Security Council members met in a private meeting on 
February 14 at the request of Russia and Serbia to discuss 
Kosovo.  61 non-Council members participated as observers. 
In a long, rhetorical intervention, Serbian FM Jeremic argued 
for the continued primacy of the Security Council in 
resolving Kosovo's status, saying that the Council was 
routinely ignored during the Cold War, but that such a time 
had now passed.  Jeremic announced that Serbia had received 
reliable information that the Provisional Institutions of 
Self-Government intend to "unilaterally and illegally declare 
independence from the Republic of Serbia in the coming days." 
 He alleged that this would violate UNSCR 1244's 
reaffirmation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of 
a UN member-state, charging that Security Council members, 
along with all UN member states, have a binding Chapter 7 
obligation to respect Serbia's sovereignty and territorial 
integrity.  Jeremic stated that Serbia's government and 
National Assembly would declare the PISG's action null and 
void and that Serbia would undertake "all diplomatic, 
political, and economic measures designed to impede and 
reverse this unprovoked attack on our sovereignty."  However, 
Jeremic did explicitly rule out the use of force and called 
on Pristina to engage in a process to find a compromise 
solution on status.  He averred that the "forcible partition 
of a UN member state" would set a global precedent and 
claimed there are "dozens of Kosovos around the world, just 
waiting for succession to be legitimized."  Jeremic declared 
that Serbia would never accept Kosovo's independence and that 
"Kosovo shall remain part of Serbia forever." 
 
¶3. (SBU) Jeremic said that in light of the grave situation 
Serbia called for the following actions: 1) the Security 
Council should act urgently in condemnation of the intent of 
the Kosovars to carry out a DI; 2) SRSG Rucker should receive 
clear instructions to use his reserve powers in the 
Constitutional framework of the PISG to nullify a DI and that 
he should also dissolve the Kosovo Assembly for violating 
UNSCR 1244; 3) and that KFOR should continue to remain status 
neutral.  Jeremic also argued that the EU-led mission to 
Kosovo requires a Security Council mandate.  Near the end of 
his intervention, Jeremic said that he was ready to be blunt 
and un-diplomatic because Serbia had suffered enough and was 
tired of seeing people "hide behind the mistakes of the past 
to justify abuse today."  He concluded by stating again that 
Kosovo would remain part of Serbia forever. 
 
RUSSIA PLAYS HOUSE COUNSEL TO SERBIA 
 
¶4. (SBU) Russian Permrep Churkin drew heavily in his 
intervention on references to Security Council and other 
documents to buttress the appeal made by Jeremic.  He stated 
that a DI would violate Article 24 of the UN charter, UNSCR 
1244 (11 a and e and Annex II, point 8) and would be 
inconsistent with the Helsinki Final Act and the 
Constitutional Framework.  Churkin insisted that a DI would 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000155  002 OF 004 
 
 
also be inconsistent with the Common Document between UNMIK 
and Belgrade of 5 November 2001 and PRST/2001/34.  He also 
argued that the situation in northern Kosovo is particularly 
concerning because Serbs there will not recognize a DI. 
Reiterating an argument made in Russia's recent paper to the 
EU, Churkin said it is not possible "to violate resolution 
1244 and act under its authority at the same time" and 
discounted pseudo-legal attempts to reinterpret it. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Churkin continued that Kosovo might become a 
European problem with EU integration, but claimed that for 
now its an international problem.  He said the Troika had 
achieved positive results in establishing direct negotiations 
between Pristina and Belgrade and that the Kosovar Albanians 
never explained why it was not possible to reach agreement on 
that basis.  Churkin stated sarcastically that American and 
EU references to Pristina's impatience sound as if "they have 
never heard of the Palestinians or, let's say, the West 
Sahrawi."  He asserted that a workable solution could be 
found on the basis of a decision of the Security Council, a 
view he claimed is shared by several Council colleagues and 
even politicians in the U.S. and Europe who are "not shackled 
by the 'office discipline'."  Churkin also made a reference 
to a resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council 
of Europe from January 22, 2008 that contains an appeal to 
continue negotiations between Pristina and Belgrade.  He 
concluded by reminding the Council that Russia's roadmap 
proposal is still on table. 
 
REST OF COUNCIL EVENLY DIVIDED 
 
¶6. (SBU) South African permrep Kumalo stated that his 
country's consistent view has been that more time is needed 
to address the Kosovo problem properly because it is one of 
the most complicated issues facing the Security Council and 
the international community.  He stated that South Africa is 
a member of the UN, the Non-Aligned Movement, and the African 
Union, all of which uphold the territorial integrity of 
sovereign states.  Kumalo concluded that a DI could have 
consequences all over the world. 
 
¶7. (SBU) French Permrep Ripert stated that the Security 
Council had discussed Kosovo many times and it had become 
clear in December that it is blocked.  Therefore, he said it 
is natural to turn to the Ahtisaari Plan, which was broadly 
supported in the Security Council, and "give Kosovo the 
status it has a right to expect." He reminded the Council 
that interim status was not meant to last forever.  He said 
the EU would respect international law under 1244 and pointed 
to the recent re-election of President Tadic as a sign that 
Serbia wants a European future. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Vietnamese Permrep Minh stated that Vietnam supports 
dialogue under the UN charter and the sovereignty and 
territorial integrity of states.  Minh called on the parties 
to exercise constraint and come to an agreed solution. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Belgian DPR Belle reminded Council members that the 
EU had said in its December statement that it supported the 
idea of a prosperous, stable Serbia that is integrated into 
the EU.  Belle underscored that stability is the main factor 
in EU decisions, including in Kosovo.  December's Security 
Council meeting confirmed that the Council is deadlocked and 
the status quo is not an option, he said, also stating that 
pursuant to resolution 1244, the EU had taken action to 
assume its responsibilities. 
 
¶10. (SBU) Indonesian Permrep Natalegawa noted stark 
differences in views among Security Council members but said 
the UN Charter is about stability so the Council should not 
shy away from the message that any solution should be 
peaceful.  A compromise solution through negotiations 
requires patience and time, he said.  A DI without the 
consent of a sovereign state would demonstrate there had been 
no solution and could have global ramifications. 
 
 
¶11. (SBU) Chinese Permrep Wang spoke against unilateral 
actions and called for a mutually acceptable solution through 
diplomatic means.  Wang argued Kosovo is a European question 
and said China hopes the EU will focus on constructive 
efforts to find a mutually acceptable solution.  Wang also 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000155  003 OF 004 
 
 
stated that negotiations require patience. 
 
¶12. (SBU) Croatia's Permrep stated that in the past his 
country had expressed hope for a mutually acceptable solution 
but regrettably this had been unachievable. 
He said the role of the EU is crucial as Kosovo falls in the 
natural scope of the EU's engagement.  He also said Croatia 
supports EU actions to take on greater responsibilities in Kosovo 
and calls on the parties to avoid any action that damages the 
humanitarian situation. 
 
¶13. (SBU) UK Permrep Sawers stated that Jeremic had made an 
eloquent speech but drawn selectively from history and 
ignored the events of 1998 and 1999.  He stated 
that Council debates from December and January had made it 
clear that we are blocked. Sawers stated that Ahtisaari's 
proposal for independence subject to international supervision 
is the best way forward.  Sawers argued that nowhere in 
UNSCR 1244 is the scope of Kosovo's final status solution 
defined or delimited. Sawers declared that nothing said 
in the day's Council session had changed the reality that the body 
is deadlocked and action has now moved to the ground and to 
Brussels.  The EU and NATO have both expressed their 
readiness to offer support. 
 
¶14. (SBU) Costa Rica's Permrep Urbina stated that his country 
supports a peaceful and negotiated solution to Kosovo's 
status but no violence if a DI occurs. He said Costa Rica wants 
substantive negotiations between the parties so the 
region can have a promising future. 
 
¶15. (SBU) Speaking for the US, Ambassador Wolff recounted the 
history of the status process and the blockage of the 
Security Council. He also pointed to the tragic 
history of the Milosevic era and the need to move beyond it 
integrate Serbia into Euro-Atlantic institutions. 
Wolff noted considerable progress in standards 
implementation and the responsible actions of Kosovo's 
authorities but expressed concern vis-a-vis Belgrade's 
attempts to stir up tension by limiting Serbian 
participation at the local level in Kosovo and opening a 
ministry office in Mitrovica.  Wolff called on Serbia and Russia 
again to support the immediate implementation of the Ahtisaari 
plan. He also underscored the sui generis nature 
of Kosovo.  Amb. Wolff's complete statement is available on 
the USUN website: 
 
(http://www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov/press releases/20080214 
027.html). 
 
 
¶16. (SBU) Permrep Attalhi stated that Libya had always 
supported a negotiated solution and called for more time. 
He said Libya supports international law and territorial 
integrity for all in the region and does not want Kosovo to go 
back to its pre-1999 status, but is concerned by the 
possibility of unilateral action.  Attalhi called for 
more negotiations leading to a compromise solution. 
 
¶17. (SBU) Burkina Faso's Permrep Kafando stated that he 
regretted that more UN members who might have wanted 
to be present had not been informed of the day's 
meeting. He recommended the pursuit of dialogue and stated it 
is "never too late to do the right thing." 
 
¶18. (SBU) Panamanian Permrep Arias said that he had 
understood Jeremic's arguments for the principles 
of territorial integrity, the UN charter and UNSCR 
¶1244.  He stated, however, that all must realize that the 
principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity 
evolve with historical circumstances. Arias said Panama 
believes in the importance of regional organizations and, 
therefore, will be guided by the EU on Kosovo.  Panama would 
have preferred negotiations leading to a solution, said 
Arias, but after many meetings does not think a Security Council 
solution is possible.  He concluded that UNSCR 1244 
is very difficult to implement because it is a resolution 
with no timetable in a constantly evolving situation. 
 
JEREMIC'S FINAL INTERVENTION 
 
¶19. (SBU) In a final rebuttal, Jeremic expressed gratitude 
 
USUN NEW Y 00000155  004 OF 004 
 
 
that a majority of Council members supported for more 
negotiations even though "the minority that 
did not is very powerful."  He declared that  Serbia is ready 
through peaceful dialogue to establish  a solution for 
Western Balkans once and for all. He charged 
that Kosovo is not unique and that observers from every 
continent who were present at the day's meeting all 
had concerns about the precedent Kosovo would set. 
Responding to references to the Ahtisaari Plan by some 
Council members, Jeremic said flatly that the plan 
had not been accepted so by what right should it be 
enforced? "Just might," he concluded.  Precedents cannot be 
debated, Jeremic asserted, because "they just happen." 
He asked the Council what is to prevent tomorrow some 
other plan by an ex-President that is rejected 
by this body from being implemented in some other region 
by a strong country that decides it likes this plan? 
 
WOLFF