Yugoslav Crisis: situation worsens as peace process continues.

As the situation in the former Yugoslavia steadily worsened he first three months of 1993, the United Nations supported intensive negotiations to contain and conclude the ethnic conflicts raging throughout the area. UN officials, describing the humanitarian situation as "desperate" and deteriorating daily, reported that those in need of assistance numbered nearly 4 million--up from 500,000 in December 1991, when the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) began operations there.

Tadeusz Mazowiecki, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, reported "numerous cases of summary executions and death threats, disappearances, torture and ill treatment of detainees and destruction of property, including religious sites", in the former Yugoslavia.

Amidst continuing reports of systematic "ethnic cleansing" and sexual assaults, the Security Council established an international war crimes tribunal to consider "serious violations" of international law committed in that area since 1991. It also authorized States and regional organizations "to take measures to ensure compliance" with the six-month-old ban on military flights over Bosnia and Herzegovina, which had been violated at least some 465 times since November 1992.

The mandate of the 23,000-strong UN Protection Force (UNPROFOR), in the region since February 1992, was renewed until the end of June 1993. it has contingents in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Appeals were made for security and stability in Croatia's "pink zones"--Serb-controlled parts of Croatia lying outside the UN Protected Areas (UNPAs).

Intensive peace talks took place in New York and Geneva for an overall political settlement of the crisis, under the auspices of the Co-chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, Cyrus Vance and Lord David Owen. By the end of March, a four-part peace package for Bosnia and Herzegovina had been accepted by the Bosnian residency and the Bosnian Croats, including agreements on human rights monitoring, a boundary commission, creation of 10 semi-autonomous provinces, and interim arrangements.

On 26 February, Lieutenant-General Lars-Eric Wahlgren of Sweden, Force Commander of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon since 1988, replaced Lieutenant-General Satish Nambiar of India as UNPROFOR Force Commander.

Between 1 January and 31 March, the Security Council met, either formally or in consultations, on 17 occasions, adopting five resolutions and issuing 12 statements.

Tribunal a first

The Security Council on 22 February decided that an international tribunal "shall be established for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991". It was the first time that the UN established an international criminal court with jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed during armed conflict.

Unanimously adopting resolution 808 (1993), the Council asked UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali to make specific proposals within 60 days for the organization and operation of such a tribunal.

France, Italy and the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) had submitted reports on the tribunal's statute, composition and rules of procedure. The Council had established in October 1992 a five-member Commission of Experts to examine information and reports of alleged "war crimes".

The Commission reported (S/25274) it had received several thousand pages of documentation, as well as video information, on allegations of grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and violations of international humanitarian law, and was preparing a database on all reported crimes.

The Commission also arranged for an investigation by a team of forensic experts of the mass grave of Ovcara, near Vukovar, in the UNPA Sector East in Croatia. Preliminary conclusions revealed that a mass execution had taken place there, probably of patients and medical staff of Vukovar Hospital who had disappeared during the evacuation of that facility on 20 November 1991.

Ban on flights

The Council on 31 March authorized Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations, to take measures, one week from that day, to ensure compliance with the ban on military flights in Bosnia and Herzegovina's airspace.

The ban, instituted in October 1992, excluded UNPROFOR and other flights in support of UN operations, including humanitarian assistance.

The Council took action to enforce the ban by adopting resolution 816 (1993) by a vote of 14 to none, with 1 abstention (China).

Acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the Council asked member States concerned, the Secretary-General and UNPROFOR to coordinate closely as to measures being taken.

The ban would continue to exclude flights authorized by UNPROFOR, including those for humanitarian assistance. UNPROFOR was to continue to monitor compliance with the ban.

In preambular paragraphs, the Council deplored the failure of some parties concerned to cooperate fully with UNPROFOR airfield monitors in implementing earlier resolutions and expressed deep concern over reported violations of the ban on military flights in Bosnia and Herzegovina's airspace.

Many violations reported

On 17 March, the Council strongly condemned violations of the "no-fly zone" over Bosnia and Herzegovina's airspace and demanded that they cease immediately. The number of observed violations was reported to be 465 since monitoring operations began in November 1992.

In a statement by Council President Terence Christopher O'Brien of New Zealand, the Council demanded from the Bosnian Serbs an immediate explanation of the aerial bombardment of two Bosnian towns--Gladovici and Osatica--by planes seen leaving in the direction of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).

The Council asked the Secretary-General to ensure that an investigation took place into the possible use of the Yugoslav territory to launch air attacks against Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Council President was to demand that the Yugoslav Foreign Minister and the Bosnian Serb leader take immediate action to prevent any repetition of such attacks.

On 19 March, Force Commander Wahlgren, in a cable to the Secretary-General, warned that the use of force to ban military flights over Bosnia and Herzegovina would have "negative consequences" for UNPROFOR in the area. He expressed particular concern that the delivery of humanitarian aid and the safety and security of UNPROFOR personnel would be jeopardized.

UNPROFOR mandate extended

On 19 February, in resolution 807 (1993), the Force's mandate had been extended for an interim period until 31 March. Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter, the Security Council, in unanimously adopting resolution 815 (1993) on 30 March, extended UNPROFOR's mandate for an additional interim period until 30 June.

In resolution 815, the Council also supported the international Conference Co-Chairmen in their efforts to define the future status of territories comprising the UNPAs, which were, it said, integral parts of Croatia. Full respect was demanded for international humanitarian law and in particular the Geneva Conventions.

UNPROFOR was established under Council resolution 743 (1992) on 21 February 1992 for an initial period of 12 months. It is principally deployed in the three former Yugoslav Republics of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Macedonia.

A Nordic battalion of nearly 700-involving troops from Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden--was dispatched to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in February, following authorization by the Council in December 1992 for UNPROFOR's deployment to monitor borders with Albania and Yugoslavia, and report on any development which would "undermine confidence and stability in Macedonia or threaten its territory".

UNPROFOR's mandate extends to Serbia and Montenegro and it has a liaison presence in Slovenia. Its current strength is 22,950 military and civilian police personnel.

Peace talks proceed

The overall peace agreement for Bosnia and Herzegovina, worked out during seven months of negotiations between September 1992 and March 1993, is contained in four separate documents. Two of them--the constitutional principles and the military agreement--have been signed by all three parties. By the end of March, the remaining two, pertaining to the map and the interim arrangements, had been signed by the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Bosnian Croats.

The International Conference Co-Chairmen conducted five rounds of peace talks between 2 January and 25 March to achieve an overall political settlement of the crisis through a complete cessation of hostilities and the establishment of a constitutional framework for Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The Council on 8 january reaffirmed the need to respect fully Bosnia and Herzegovina's sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence.

In a statement by Council President Yoshio Hatano of Japan, the Council fully endorsed the Secretary-General's view in his 6 January report (S/25050) that it was the duty of all parties involved in the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, "despite the recent provocation", to cooperate with the Co-Chairmen in bringing that conflict to an end swiftly.

The Council appealed to all parties involved to cooperate to the fullest with the peace efforts and warned any party which would oppose an overall political settlement against the consequences of such an attitude. It stated that lack of cooperation and non-compliance with relevant Council resolutions would compel it to review the situation "in an urgent and most serious manner, and to consider further necessary measures .

The Secretary-General's report described the activities of the International Conference, which had resumed in Geneva on 2 January with the participation of the three sides to the conflict: the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the leadership of both the Bosnian Serbs and the Bosnian Croats. Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were also represented. (The Geneva phase of the Conference first met on 3 September 1992.)

To be discussed at the Conference were: a sustainable cessation of hostilities; demilitarization of Sarajevo; an agreement on a pull-back from the military front line in a way that reinforces and goes with the grain of an overall political settlement; free access of all citizens in and out of besieged cities and towns; and free movement of humanitarian aid.

The January talks represented the first time that the three sides to the Bosnian conflict had sat down together for peace talks, the Secretary-General observed.

The Secretary-General described the talks as "a historic step forward in the pursuit of peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina". All delegations had pledged their cooperation in the search for peaceful solutions, he said.

Agreement on constitutional principles

The Conference resumed on 10 January On 20 January, the Secretary-General reported that the constitutional principles proposed by the Co-Chairmen had been unconditionally accepted by all sides. Agreement on the proposed provincial map of a 10-province structure would be sought.

A further round of peace talks was held in Geneva from 23 to 30 January.

Following the peace talks in New York from 3 to 8 February, the Secretary-General reported (S/25248) on 8 February that the Bosnian Government was not willing to discuss either the provincial boundaries or interim governmental arrangements, and declined to meet with the other two sides.

The Bosnian Serb side continued to maintain that many predominantly Serb areas had been excluded from Serb majority provinces. It would accept and sign the map, it said, only if the populations of contested areas were consulted. That was rejected by the Co-Chairmen on the ground that there had been "so much 'ethnic cleansing' and displacement of population in Bosnia and Herzegovina" that such consultations would not be democratic.

The Bosnian Croats had accepted both the map and the constitutional principles. The Bosnian Serbs, however, still rejected a revised map with modifications in the proposed provincial boundaries.

To stop the war

On 8 February, Mr. Vance told the Security Council during consultations that the first and fundamental objective of the peace talks was to stop the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Both he and Lord Owen were concerned about the danger of the conflict spreading in the Balkan region, and were committed to stopping the criminal practice of "ethnic cleansing" and reversing its consequences.

They had proposed a range of mechanisms for protecting human and minority rights in the future, including the setting up of a constitutional court, a human rights court, four ombudsmen with broad powers of investigation and action, and an international commission on human rights for Bosnia and Herzegovina. They strongly advocated the establishment of an international criminal court to try persons accused of crimes against humanity.

The International Conference, he stressed, had constantly sought to maintain the status of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a sovereign, independent, integral and multi-ethnic State. "We rejected proposals from the outset for Bosnia and Herzegovina to be organized as a confederation with three constituent units--in effect three States-within-a-State", he said.

On 10 February, the Co-Chairmen welcomed the United States decision to take an active role in the former Yugoslavia (by the appointment of Reginald Bartholomew as its special envoy to the international talks on the former Yugoslavia) and to back its political commitment with the readiness to enforce a comprehensive settlement.

Airport offensive deplored

In an 11 February statement, the Secretary-General deplored a major offensive by forces of the Bosnian Government against the Sarajevo suburb of Ilidza abutting the airport. That development had disrupted the flow of much-needed humanitarian assistance, he said.

The airport had been caught in the crossfire and UNPROFOR soldiers there were in "alert state red", confining them to their protected shelters.

The Secretary-General called urgently on the parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina to cease hostilities and end the continuing cycle of conflict that had already caused too many casualties and inflicted so much destruction.

Peace talks resume ...

On 24 February, the Security Council endorsed the statement made on 23 February in Washington, D.C. by United States President Bill Clinton and Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali, calling on the leaders of the parties to the peace talks on Bosnia and Herzegovina to come to New York immediately to resume discussions with a view to the early conclusion of an agreement to end the conflict.

Peace talks were resumed n New York from 1 to 6 March.

On 12 March, the Secretary-General reported (S/25403) that after six months of intensive negotiations, it was crucial that the Bosnian Government and the Bosnian Serbs agree to and sign the provincial map as quickly as possible so that implementation of the peace plan might begin.

He noted that agreement had been reached between the three Bosnian parties to establish an international human rights monitoring mission, based in Sarajevo and supported by international human rights monitors, deployed throughout the country, particularly in areas affected by ethnic cleansing.

On 3 March, President Alija Izetbegovic of Bosnia and Herzegovina signed the military part of the peace plan. A major agreement had also been reached by Bosnian Croats and the Government "on matters relating to the Constitution".

A UN official said that all three parties to the conflict had agreed to two of the three elements of the peace plan--an important step towards "the ultimate goal of getting agreement on which a meaningful cease-fire and a cessation of hostility could be based". The missing piece was an agreement on the provincial map. It was stressed that the three parts were interrelated.

... But attacks continue

Also on 3 March, the Security Council condemned the continuing military attacks in eastern Bosnia by Serb paramilitary units "even as peace talks are continuing" in New York. The Council was particularly concerned about the fall of the town of Cerska and neighbouring villages. In a statement by Council President Donald McKinnon, Foreign Minister of New Zealand, the Council demanded that the killings of innocent civilians and other atrocities stop. Those guilty of crimes against international humanitarian law would be held "individually responsible" by the world community, it said.

The Council also demanded an immediate cessation of all military action throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina, unimpeded access of humanitarian relief supplies, especially to the besieged cities of eastern Bosnia, and evacuation

of the wounded. UNPROFOR's presence in eastern Bosnia should be immediately increased. Leaders of all parties to the conflict should remain fully engaged in the peace talks to reach quickly a fair settlement.

A further round of peace talks was held in New York from 16 to 25 March. On 25 March, the Co-Chairmen reported "a major step forward" in the signing by the Bosnian Muslims of the provincial map and the interim arrangements. However, they regretted that the Bosnian Serbs had not signed.

The Council also welcomed the signatures by President Izetbegovic and Mate Boban, leader of the Bosnian Croats, of all four documents of the Vance-Owen peace plan.

In a statement by Council President O'Brien, the Council called upon the remaining party to sign without delay the map and the interim arrangements, and to cease its violence, offensive military actions, "ethnic cleansing" and obstruction of humanitarian assistance. The Council stated its readiness to take steps required to bring about the peace settlement and called for an immediate cessation of hostilities by all parties.

On 26 March, the Secretary-General reported (S/25479) that the Co-Chairmen's peace package provided the "only mechanism available for the re-establishment of peace, with justice and respect for human rights, in Bosnia and Herzegovina".

He strongly urged the Council to approve the whole peace package and call upon the Bosnian Serbs to sign the map and interim arrangements "so that attention may be concentrated henceforth on the implementation of the plan".

After seven months of intensive negotiations, he said, only one side--the Bosnian Serbs--"lags behind" in signature of two of the four documents making up the overall package.

All three sides had agreed to an international human rights monitoring mission and a boundary commission, he said. Any enforcement of the "no-fly zone", tightening of sanctions or the placing of UN military observers around the border of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, should be accompanied by the Council's unqualified endorsement of the peace package, he recommended.

Crisis in Croatia

A Croatian military offensive in january against strategic locations in and adjacent to a UN Protected Area was followed by the forcible removal by Serb forces of heavy weapons under UN control.

The Security Council on 22 January deplored the Croatian army offensive that took place that day in the "pink zones", as well as violations by all sides of the UN peace-keeping plan. It appealed to all parties to cooperate fully with the peace process in the region.

In a statement by Council President Hatano, the Council urged Croatian authorities "to withdraw their forces to positions occupied before the offensive" and thereby support efforts of the UNPROFOR Force Commander to diffuse the situation.

Also on 22 January, the Secretary-General deplored the "unilateral military action" by Croatian authorities in the "pink zones". That action, he said, was a "setback" to UNPROFOR efforts in Croatia to achieve a peaceful transfer of control in the "pink zones".

He reported that Croatian President Franjo Tudiman had told the UNPROFOR Force Commander that the military action was aimed at providing security for the construction of a bridge at Maslenica. His forces would not withdraw from the site, but had no intention of extending operations to other areas.

The UNPROFOR Force Commander also called upon local Serb authorities to exercise restraint and not to embark upon a cycle of action and retaliation, which could have "calamitous consequences".

On 25 January, the Council, in unanimously adopting resolution 802 (1993), demanded that Croatian armed forces immediately cease hostile activities in or adjacent to the UNPAs and withdraw from those areas, and that the Serb local authorities return the heavy weapons recently seized from UNPROFOR-controlled storage areas.

Comply strictly

The Council also demanded that all parties concerned comply strictly with agreed cease-fire arrangements and respect fully the safety of UN personnel. Croatian forces must immediately cease their attacks against UNPROFOR in the conduct of its duty of protecting civilians in the UNPAs.

All parties concerned must cooperate unconditionally in implementing the UN peace-keeping plan, including the disbanding and demobilization of Serb Territorial Defence units or other similar units. All concerned should refrain from any actions which might undermine current efforts aimed at reaching a political settlement.

On 26 January, the Secretary-General deeply deplored continuing military action by Croatian armed forces, which had placed the entire peace process in the region in jeopardy, and appealed to both sides to cease military action forthwith.

On 27 January, the Council again called on all parties in the former Yugoslavia to cease immediately military action within or adjacent to the UNPAs in Croatia and demanded full respect for the safety of UN personnel.

In a 10 February report (S/25264), the Secretary-General said that unless a negotiated settlement was reached between the Croatian Government and the Serb population in the "pink zones". a "sound basis would not exist" for renewing the UNPROFOR mandate in Croatia.

The primary reason for the Force's deployment in Croatia, he said, was to create conditions under which a political settlement could be negotiated.

Warning that the situation could lead to large-scale hostilities if UNPROFOR was withdrawn from the region, the Secretary-General said he had asked the Co-Chairmen to pursue a solution urgently.

On 25 March, the Secretary-General reported (S/25470) that any termination of the UNPROFOR presence would entail the strong likelihood of an outbreak of renewed hostilities. An extension of its mandate was required to provide more time for a meaningful conclusion of negotiations between the Croatian Government and the Serb populations in the UNPAs and the "pink zones".

Humanitarian deliveries impeded 

The Security Council on 25 January warned parties to the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina of "serious consequences", in accordance with relevant Council resolutions, if delivery of humanitarian relief assistance continued to be impeded. All parties concerned, in particular Serb paramilitary units, must "cease and desist forthwith from all violations of international humanitarian law", particularly the deliberate interference with humanitarian convoys.

In a statement by Council President Hatano, the Council deeply regretted that the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina had "imposed great limits" on the international community in the fulfilment of its humanitarian mandate. The Secretary-General was asked to review continuously the possibility of air-dropping relief supplies to areas isolated by the conflict.

On 2 February, a Bosnian interpreter was killed and the leader of a Danish convoy was seriously injured in a shelling attack on a humanitarian convoy returning to Metkovic after delivering supplies of food, medicines and blankets to central Bosnia, according to UNHCR. Both persons worked for a Danish relief agency.

UN High Commissioner for Refugees Sadako Ogata strongly condemned the attack and said that only five days earlier she had been given assurances by leaders of all three Bosnian parties that they would respect the humanitarian nature of relief convoys and guarantee them safe passage. She said she was holding the leaders personally responsible for the safety of UNHCR humanitarian convoys and demanded that a full investigation be conducted.

On 12 February, Mrs. Ogata condemned the Bosnian Serb policy of denying humanitarian convoys access to the besieged enclaves of eastern Bosnia as a means of "starving people out of their homes".

In a letter to the Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic, she reminded him of his repeated assurances that such convoys would be guaranteed unhindered, safe passage, and pointed out that "victims do have a right to receive international assistance in their place of residence".

Operations suspended

On 17 February, Mrs. Ogata suspended many UNHCR operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina because of the "failure of all parties" to respect humanitarian principles. She decided to move UNHCR convoys back to their bases and suspend immediately all relief activities in Serbian-controlled Bosnia.

She also recommended: suspension of all UNHCR activities in Sarajevo and withdrawal of most staff, leaving only a skeleton presence in the besieged city of 380,000 people; suspension of land convoys and the airlift to Sarajevo; and maintaining, at a reduced level, UNHCR relief operations in areas where they could still operate.

Bosnian Serbs, she reported, were refusing humanitarian convoys access to more than 100,000 besieged people in eastern Bosnian villages. "The Croats were hampering delivery of relief supplies in other areas and now the Bosnian Government itself is refusing to allow the distribution of relief to those so desperately in need in Sarajevo", she said.

For months, she pointed out, UNHCR, UN staff and nongovernmental organizations had been risking their lives in the middle of a war to deliver humanitarian assistance to more than 3 million refugees and displaced persons in the former Yugoslavia.

Also on 17 February, the Council condemned the blocking of humanitarian convoys and the impeding of relief supplies in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which endangered the lives of personnel delivering those supplies and placed the civilian population at risk.

In a statement by Council President Ahmed Snoussi of Morocco, the Council demanded immediate and unimpeded access for humanitarian relief supplies.

On 21 February, Mrs. Ogata decided to resume full relief operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina after receiving assurances from all parties that they would no longer hinder the delivery or distribution of humanitarian relief. The decision came following her consultations with the Secretary-General.

A new |weapon of war'

On 11 March, the Security Council heard a report by Mrs. Ogata behind closed doors. She said that the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina was steadily deteriorating and that, in the absence of peace, the international relief effort could "not be sustained for long, at least not in its present form".

Mrs. Ogata pointed out that 2.28 million people--half the original population of Bosnia and Herzegovina--received humanitarian assistance from UNHCR. During the past few weeks, she said, only half of the targeted 8,000 tonnes per week of humanitarian supplies had been delivered, symbolizing the increasing use of prohibition of relief as a weapon of war and "ethnic cleansing".

On 17 March, the UN launched a new appeal for $840 million to cover its relief assistance programme in the former Yugoslavia.

Air drops by United States

On 23 February the Secretary-General met with United States President Bill Clinton in Washington to discuss an American humanitarian initiative and its coordination with UNHCR and UNPROFOR.

President Clinton on 25 February announced that his country would conduct humanitarian air drops over Bosnia and Herzegovina. Their purpose was to supplement land convoys, as a temporary measure, to address the immediate needs of isolated areas that could not be reached by ground. Regular overland deliveries were the best means to ensure that the long-term needs of the Bosnian population were met, he said, stressing that priority for air deliveries would be determined without regard to ethnic or religious affiliation.

Later on 25 February, the Security Council expressed strong support for the use of humanitarian air drops, in full coordination with the UN, in isolated areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina that were in critical need of relief supplies and could not be reached by ground convoys.

In a statement by President Snoussi, the Council strongly condemned once again the blocking of humanitarian convoys that, in spite of repeated demands, continued to be impeded by Serb paramilitary units, especially in the eastern parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, namely in the enclaves of Srebrenica, Cerska, Gorazde an Zepa.

The deliberate impeding of the delivery of food and humanitarian relief essential for the survival of the civilian population in Bosnia and Herzegovina constituted a violation of the Geneva Conventions, the Council said, adding it was committed to ensuring that individuals responsible for such acts were brought to justice.

Situation in Srebrenica

As the eastern Bosnian town of Srebrenica came under attack on 24 March, the Secretary-General called on Serb forces to halt the "unjustifiable attack" which, he said, had occurred despite explicit assurances by Bosnian Serb leaders in the area and in New York. He also was particularly anxious about the safety of UN personnel in and around Srebrenica.

On 18 March, High Commissioner Ogata expressed strong concern over obstacles preventing the delivery of vital relief supplies to the area.

"I vehemently condemn the unaccceptable attitude of the Bosnian Serb military, who are preventing--despite all their verbal and written commitments--the access of humanitarian assistance to the victims", Mrs. Ogata said.

Blockade, fraud, rape

The Security Council on 10 February condemned the unjustifiable detention of Romanian vessels on the Danube. The action followed reports that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had detained Romanian vessels and threatened to detain more if Romania did not allow the passage of Yugoslav vessels on the Danube.

In a statement by President Snoussi, the Council said it was "wholly unacceptable" for the Yugoslav authorities to take "retaliatory measures" in response to action by a State fulfilling its obligations under the UN Charter. It demanded that Yugoslavia immediately release the Romanian vessels and desist from further unlawful detentions.

The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia informed the Committee monitoring sanctions against it that t e Romanian vessels would be released.

The Council recalled President Hatano's statement on 2 reporting that Yugoslav vessels carrying oil from Ukraine to Serbia by way of the Danube had violated mandatory Council resolutions. The Council had called on the Ukraine to ensure that no further shipments were permitted.

In a 5 January statement, the Sanctions Committee Chairman asked for an investigation of reports of fraud aimed at facilitating the illicit import of large quantities of oil and petroleum products into the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, through misuse or falsification of UN documents.

A team of medical experts, which in January investigated allegations of widespread rape in the former Yugoslavia, found strong evidence that that had occurred on a large scale during the conflict and had been committed by combatants on all sides.

Solid evidence was found that Croatian, Muslim and Serbian women had been detained for extended periods of time and raped repeatedly. However, the majority of the rapes documented had been committed against Bosnian Muslim women. In Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Croatia, rape had been used as an instrument of "ethnic cleansing", it was stated.

World Court asks for prevention of genocide 

The International Court of Justice on 8 April issued an Order which called upon the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to "immediately ... take all measures within its power to prevent commission of the crime of genocide ... whether directed against the Muslim population of Bosnia and Herzegovina or against any other national, ethnical, racial or religious group".

The provisional measures were in response to a suit initiated by Bosnia and Herzegovina on 20 March.

Controversy over Macedonia

A controversy over the name and status of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has delayed its joining the United Nations.

During Security Council consultations on 23 February on the admission of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to the UN, Council President Ahmed Snoussi of Morocco reported on meetings held with the Foreign Minister of Greece and the Deputy Prime Minister of the former Yugoslav Republic. Council support for a quick solution to the problem was reported. It was felt that the inclusion of that country in the UN would be a factor for stability in the area.

On 30 July 1992, Macedonian President Kiro Gligorov wrote to the Secretary-General (A/471876-S/25147) applying for membership, stating that its admission to the UN would be "a very significant step towards the peaceful solution of the crisis in the territory of former Yugoslavia". He said his country had accepted Charter obligation and fully supported the UN and the enhancement of its role in promoting international peace, security and justice.

The letter was circulated as an official document on 22 January, following Council consultations concerning the receivability of the application.

In a 25 January letter to the UN (A/471877-S/25158), Greek Foreign Minister Michael Papaconstantinou objected to the application of the former Yugoslav Republic under the name "Republic of Macedonia", arguing that the move would lead to a further destabilization of the southern Balkans, both in short- and long-term perspectives.

He stated that "the exclusive use of the Macedonian name in the republic's official denomination would be a stimulus for expansionist claims not only by present nationalist activists in Skopje but by future generations as well".

Greece said the authorities in Skopie had adopted the name of a wider geographical region extending over four neighbouring countries, with only 38.5 per cent of the region commonly known as Macedonia to be found in the former Yugoslav Republic. About 51 per cent of the Macedonian geographical region are in Greece, with a population of 2.5 million people, while the remaining 10 per cent are in other neighbouring States.

Greece said it was in the Council's competence not only to resolve disputes but also to prevent them as well. "This is a dear case where preventive diplomacy is urge needed", it said.

[On 8 April, The former Yugo, slav Republic of Macedonia was admitted to the UN, raising the membership to 181.]