WASHINGTON OR DAYTON FOR THE PORT OF PLOCE

Croatia Offers Confederation to the Federation

AIM Sarajevo, 21 October, 1997

The Federation of Bosnia & Herzegovina, according to allegations of high officials from the ranks of the Bosniac people, will not establish confederate relations with the neighbouring Republic of Croatia because this would be contrary to the provisions of the Dayton accords. The idea about creation of the confederation and reverting to the Washington agreement which makes this possible, was initiated by Croatian politicians towards the end of last week.

"The Dayton accords are a superior document to the Washington agreement, and they do not prescribe any confederate relations. The Dayton accords regulate relations of Bosnia & Herzegovina and the neighbouring countries through establishment of special relations", said Mirza Hajric, advisor of the president of Presidency of B&H, rejecting the possibility of creation of the confederation.

In 1994, the Republic of Bosnia & Herzegovina and the Republic of Croatia signed the agreement in Washington which, along with a number of other provisions, included the possibility of establishing confederate relations. In the meantime, the general peace agreement was signed in Dayton which prescribed establishment of special relations with neighbouring states, Croatia and Serbia.

    On Sunday evening, vice prime minister and minister of

defence of the Republic of Croatia, Mate Granic and Gojko Susak, declared that their state wished to revert to the Washington agreement and the confederation with the Federation of Bosnia & Herzegovina. According to the words of high Croatian officials, consultations with president Tudjman have already been completed about preparation of the contract on reverting to the agreement from spring 1994, and on preparations of the confederation contract with the Federation of B&H. "But, we do not know how the other party will react to it", Granic and Susak declared on the occasion.

    In the first, unofficial statement, officials from

Sarajevo reacted by clarifying that the confederation was a community of at least two states, and that in this case there was only one state (Republic of Croatia) and one entity.

The ambassador of B&H in Zagreb, Kasim Trnka, as one of the participants in creation of the Dayton peace accords, explains that there is no confederation in the Dayton solutions, and that according to the peace accords, the holder of sovereignty is B&H and not the Federation, and that only the former can sign this kind of contracts with other states.

Mariofil Ljubic, chairman of the Chamber of Nations of the Federal Parliament, claims however, that the confederation is along the lines of implementation of the Washington agreement: "Croatian state representatives have never given up on it, regardless of the Dayton accords".

"The talks about confederate relations can in any case improve relations between the Republic of Croatia and the Federation, especially since the scope of these relations agreed in Washington does not violate the sovereignty of B&H", declared Ljubic.

In answer to a journalist's question whether this meant that Republica Srpska could also demand confederate relations with FR Yugoslavia, he declared that this question could not be resolved by reciprocity. Especially, he claimed, because Croatia and the Federation already had special relations.

The decision of the Republic of Croatia on "reverting to the Washington agreement" followed as a reaction to the current hesitation and haggling about the port of Ploce. At the same time when the declaration of Croatian leaders was launched, Croatian vice prime minister Ljerka Mintas-Hodak declared that an agreement on special relations with the Federation was being prepared in a hurry, which would include passage through Neum and the condition of renting a part of the port of Ploce.

As concerning the port of Ploce, Mintas-Hodak was resolute, Croatia would prepare its proposals and conditions because it did not accept the American ones. In the Croatian proposals and conditions, the dimensions of the free zone would be specified, and who would manage it, what jobs would be carried out in it, who would resolve possible disputes and the period of time the rent contract referred to.

The already mentioned Izetbegovic's advisor Mirza Hajric claims that the obligation of the Republic of Croatia to rent the port of Ploce to Bosnia & Herzegovina remains, and that there should be no misunderstanding about it.

"Obligations concerning the port of Ploce were agreed in Washington and they are not contrary to the Dayton accords. Everything that the agreement from Washington contains that is contrary to the agreement from Dayton should be eliminated. Only that which exists in both or that does not lead to contradiction is valid", claims Hajric.

A high official of the Federation who demanded to remain anonymous claims that the Republic of Croatia offered the proposal aware in advance that the Federation could not accept it. "They have set things like this. We are offering you the confederation prescribed by the Washington agreement, you don't want it because you say that it is not in accordance with Dayton. If you don't want the confederation and the Washington agreement, it means that you don't want the port of Ploce either", this source claims.

Leaders of the Federation have not come out in public with an official statement yet. About the Croatian offer, which according to allegations of our source "seems insincere, but is extremely serious" (it was uttered by the closest associates of president Tudjman, claiming that he had agreed) the final stand of the entity authorities still needs to be heard. The B&H Press agency (close to the ruling structures) carried on Sunday the statement of a member of the American expert team Louis Sell who claims that the United States of America, if no agreement is reached with the Republic of Croatia about the rent for at least 30 years, will revert to Washington agreement which prescribes rent of the port of Ploce for 99 years.

Although two days have passed since the public appearance of Mate Granic and Gojko Susak, not a single political party from the Federation officially reacted. Neither did the office of the high representative of the international community, who had at one moment insisted on coordination of the Washington and the Dayton agreements address the public concerning this issue.

Sandra KASALO

(AIM Sarajevo)