INTERVIEW WITH ZARKO DOMLJAN

WE SHALL NOT CALL OFF UNPROFOR

AIM, ZAGREB, July 20,1994

After the two-day long debate in the Assembly's House of Representatives on the status of the UN Peace Keeping Forces in Croatia which ended with the adoption of a Resolution proclaiming the calling off of UNPROFOR's further mission in Croatia in its present mandate, we asked Dr. Zarko Domljan, the Vice-President of the Assembly and prominent member of the Croatian Democratic Union, how he sees Croatia's future without the UN forces?

DOMLJAN: There is a lot of speculation and guessing about that possibility, but I personally do not believe that notice will be given to the Peace-keeping Forces. I am more inclined to believe that there will be a substiantial change in their mandate, namely, that it will attain a new quality.

AIM: What do you have in mind?

DOMLJAN: In my opinion in addition to their peace-keeping activities, they will be able to impose peace or at least attempt, through political, if not military means, to achieve what they were suppose to from the very beginning, and that is the implementation of all the UN Security Council resolutions. We are faced with a situation in which UNPROFOR failed to carry out any of the tasks for which they were sent to Croatia to do, with the exception of the initial results achieved in connection with the withdrawal of the Yugoslav People's Army and partial cessation of hostilities. Likewise, nothing was accomplished regarding the realization of their additional tasks stipulated in nearly one hundred resolutions. If we were to take stock of the results of the Peace Forces, it would be absolutely negative. Taking all this into consideration, we must seriously contemplate whether we we wish to prolong, after 30 September, this status of the UN Peace Forces.

AIM: The special envoy of the UN Secretary General, Mr. Akashi clearly pointed out that the Security Council does not want to jeopardize the sovereignty of Croatia, namely that if the Assembly and Government bring a decision to refuse further hospitality to UNPROFOR, they would withdraw. What would that mean for Croatia at this point?

DOMLJAN: The so called Krajina, namely the occupied regions in Croatia would remain without the protection of the Peace Forces. After all, they are now protecting an illegal government which is not ready to negotiate and which is showing no good will to find an adequate solution, and in addition to that which is not permitting the return of refugeees, but on the contrary, is continuing with ethnic cleansing and which is, simply speaking, blocking Croatia's economic activities. Croatia really has no need for any peace forces which are protecting such an abnormal state.

AIM: The Croatian authorities will have to bring a final decision in September. The Assembly has enthrusted the Government and all the negotiators to coordinate their further steps with the accepted Resolution. Will Parliament undertake any other measures in regard to UNPROFOR?

DOMLJAN: In the Resolution accepted by the Parliament it is indicated that we will monitor their activities in the next two months, namely, see if they have changed anything in their methods of work. There is not doubt that they are very well aware of the messages of the refugees protest actions, public opinion and stands of the Asembly. If these very clear messages are understood well, then some kind of change will have to take place, or at least their behaviour will have to change. In that case of course the Croatian authorities, and the Assembly will conditionaly prolong their mandate, for one, two or three months in order to render possible a favourable development of the situation in the country.

AIM: What if that change does not take place?

DOMLJAN: If no change occurs, I believe we will have no alternative but to cancel the further stay of the Peace Forces in Croatia.

AIM: It was observed in the course of the debate that refusing UNPROFOR further hospitality would imply a war option, something, as we have been warned, that would not be conducive either vis-a-vis the situation in the armed forces or the international environment.

DOMLJAN: Cancelling the mandate of the Peace Forces in Croatia would by no means imply in itself a war option. And since the option of war has alrady been mentioned, I wish to point out that this is not a case of war between two states, but only of limited police force actions aimed at establishing order in a state. After all, we have at present irregular circumstances in the state which we cannot address due to the presence of the Peace Forces. Their departure would create preconditions for ensuring, here and there, where ever necessary, through limited police actions the normal functioning of the Croatian state. Will this be resorted to and when, depends primarily of whether the rebelled Serbs will become more flexible in the negotiations after the departure of UN forces, since we on our part will certainly take every possible effort to resolve the existing situation through peaceful and political means. Consequently, we shall do everything possible, including the making of numerous concessions, but we rennounce the integrality of the Croatian territory and sovereignty on the entire region.

AIM: The Ambassadors of the USA and Germany in Croatia, as well as some representatives of international institutions call upon official Zagreb to be patient. Is there any patience left in the political circles, since it is evident that as far as the refugees are concerned, it has been worn out to the extreme limits.

DOMLJAN: They are call upon us to be patient as far as possible limited police actions on the occupied territory are concerned. They are the ones that should be also called upon to understand the 250 thousand refugees who have not been able, for four years now, to return to their homes as well as those who have not received to this day any information on what has happened to their family members who have disappeared, or else who have been imprisoned or killed. Therefore, Croatia is doing nothing which is not in line with democratic principles, but rather those who have occupied parts of its territory, who are rendering impossible the undertaking of investigations, as in the case of Ovcari, or else who are mining the waterworks at Kakma.

AIM: It has remained unclear, even after discussions that lasted two days, why the current authorities have consented to UNPROFOR's mandate which is actually unacceptable to everyone, and due to which, as far back as two years ago, some of the ministers in the Government of democratic unity resigned from office, precisely, as TOMAC and BUDISA indicated, because it posed a threat of turning Croatia into another Cyprus?

DOMLJAN: Everyone is wise afterwards and everyone is a general after the battle, but it was necessary in a situation when Dubrovnik was being bombed and when Vukovar was falling, namely in a situation such as it was in 1991, to asssess what should be done and how the situation should be delt with. The arrival of the Peace Forces suited Croatia at that time, and another thing that should be kept in mind, namely that the recognition of Croatia depended on agreeing to it. At that time it was a complex decision to make, one about which it is easy to speaculate about and try to derive political benefit for oneself and one's party. For Croatia it was useful, for more than one reason, to accept at the end of 1991, namely, until its recognition on January 15, 1992, the Peace Forces with a limited mandate, although we should not forget that their stay has been prolonged since then 4 or 5 times, and that their tasks have been expanded since then. The fact should be borne in mind that they did not actually come to Croatia, but to the territory of some kind of Yugoslavia, and that in a way their status is to this very day illegal in our state. A status which is tolerated, but which is from the point of view of international law absolutely unsettled, and strictly speaking, they have no right to be on the territory of a sovereign state that is a member of the United Nations.

AIM: In addition to its ineffectiveness, UNPROFOR is also criticised, both in the protests of the refugees and in the Assembly debates, for partaking in various illegal acts, including the black-marketing of petrol, cigarettes and other goods. The representative of the Community of Refugees, Mr. Matekovic, presented at at the very session of the Assembly, the testimonies of the refugees according to which the police officers at one of the UNPA crossings told them that the Government had approved the transport of a specific quantity of fuel to the occupied territories for the needs of the harvest.

DOMLJAN: That is correct, and precisely because of that, one of the items of our Resolution is the request that the Government controls the movememnt of goods and people to and from the UNPA zones, since it has been noticed that much larger quantities of goods have been transported into the area than is required to meet the needs of the population there and for supplying the UN units. It is clear that the goods transferred to that region are subsequently freely dispatched to Bosnia and Serbia, while Croatia is obliged to control these crossings, both in order to protect its interests as well as because of the sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro. Certaintly such stories are frequented exagerated, but the overall trade in goods should be under the control of Croatian authorities. After all,we cannot allow UNPROFOR to stroll about Croatia as they wish and be exempted from the constitutional and legal system of Croatia.

AIM: What are your estimates, as the Vice-President of the Assembly and influential member of the HDZ who has participated in the negotiations for overcoming the current parliamentary crisis, of the chances for achieving an inter-party agreement and joint decision-making on the status of UNPROFOR?

DOMLJAN: There is no doubt that for reaching such an important decision regarding the further presence of the Peace Forces in Croatia it would be desirable for the opposition parties to take part in the sessions of Parliament which they are now boycotting.I hope that a reasonable solution will be found for I do not see any reason for their continued absence, and actually such a form of protest would be justified if another Asembly existed. However, there is no other Assembly and regardless of whether an affinity for or dislike of its top official exists, it is necessary to be in it if one wishes to be politically active. In my opinion, considerable political damage was caused by all those who did not take part in the discussions on the mandate of the Peace Forces.

AIM: Your comparison of the meeting of the Club of Opposition and Independent Representatives devoted to UNPROFOR's mandate with the gathering of the Serbs in the town of Srb caused reactions not only because of the comparison itself but also because of your role in the negotiations with the opposition.

DOMLJAN: I did not compare the opposition with the gathering in Srb, but said that an attempt to create another parallel Assembly could have serious and disagreeable conotations and that if such an idea existed, everything possible should be done in order to avoid the unfavourable association with the mentioned gathering in Srb. Although I said that during a meeting closed to the press, the journalist asked Budisa to comment the statement, and in our telephone conversation, which took place after that, I explained to him that the opposition parties which are obstructing the work of the Parliament, should be carefull and avoid that the very announcement of holding a parallel Assembly does not provoke associations with that gathering, which could, after all, become quite awkward for those parties.

GORDANA SIMONOVIC