Ne znam čemu takav ton, nisam imao namjeru nikog provocirati.....
Pogledaj malo kronologiju oko Prevlake
http://www.un.int/croatia/statement/doc/doc_011299.htm
BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS
On various occasions, including during the Dayton peace talks,
FRY proposed to Croatia the exchange of Prevlaka for some other territory. Croatia refused these offers, but accepted to search for a mutually acceptable security arrangement. Pursuant to the commitments contained in the Vance Plan, several Security Council resolutions, and especially, the Geneva Joint Declaration (see Fact Sheet on UN Military Observers on Prevlaka), the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) included the issue of Prevlaka in their Agreement on Normalization of Relations, signed in Belgrade on 23 August 1996 (S/1996/706, Annex). Thus, further to all bilateral agreements and positions taken by the international community, the overall security of Dubrovnik and Boka Kotorska remained the only outstanding issue to be negotiated.
The Republic of Croatia formally submitted its draft text for an agreement on a permanent solution of the security issue of Prevlaka to the FRY on 15 June 1998 (S/1998/533). The Croatian proposal advanced the following points: (i) demarcation of the existing international land border; (ii) permanent opening of the border crossing points Debeli Brijeg and Konfin; (iii) delimitation of border at sea; (iv) asymmetrical demilitarization according to the 1:2.5 ratio in favor of the Yugoslav side for a period of five years; (v) verification regime by a joint inter-state commission.
The FRY then submitted its proposal to the Croatian side on 10 July 1998 (S/1998/632). The FRY proposal advanced the following points: (i) delimitation on land and at sea; (ii) Prevlaka will be used solely for peaceful purposes and possibly be permanently demilitarized; (iii) a permanent border crossing point shall be established “along the Herceg Novi-Sutorina-Dubrovnik motorway”, (iv) border traffic regime shall be established for specific counties in FRY/Montenegro and in Croatia.
Following the establishment of the Joint Commission on Prevlaka, the negotiating teams have so far held three meetings: the first in Zagreb on 16 September 1998, the second in Belgrade on 9 October 1998, and the third in Zagreb on 23 December 1998. The representatives of Montenegro participated in the first and boycotted the other two rounds of negotiations over the disagreement with the refusal of the FRY federal authorities to open border crossing points between Montenegro and Croatia.
Due to lack of willingness of FRY to engage in bona fidae negotiations -- from refusal to receive maps and other documentation offered by the Croatian team to repeated postponement of previously agreed meetings -- no substantive progress has been made (Letter of the Croatian Foreign Minister Granić to the Foreign Minister of FRY of 9 December 1998, S/1999/19, Annex). The withdrawal of the Montenegrin Government appointed representatives from the Yugoslav negotiating team is a direct result of the refusal of the federal authorities of FRY to accept the opening of border crossing points with the Republic of Croatia in the area of Prevlaka. While Croatia’s unilateral opening of the border crossing points Debeli Brijeg and Konfin in the area of Prevlaka for the All Saints and Christmas holiday season 1998/1999 was welcomed by the population and leadership of Montenegro, the federal authorities of FRY formally protested this act, and in that manner clearly indicated where the problem lies. Croatia firmly believes that the opening of the border crossing points Debeli Brijeg and Konfin is beneficial not only for the local population on both sides of the border, but also positively reflects on confidence building and regional stability.
The nature of the disagreement became finally transparent to all only on 24 December 1998 when FRY submitted to the Security Council its Memorandum on the negotiating position on Prevlaka (S/1998/1225, Annex II). The Memorandum states that
FRY “considers Prevlaka its own territory on the basis of the principle of uti possidetis de facto”, that “no delimitation has ever been carried out in history in the disputed region”, that the Security Council has been considering Prevlaka under the agenda item “Situation in Croatia” as “the result of inertia”, and that “there are no private owners of land in Cape Oštro, i.e., Prevlaka”.
Following six Security Council resolutions dealing exclusively with Prevlaka and six extensions of the UNMOP mandate, the record suggests that the continuation of the UNMOP mandate without decisive impetus from the Security Council shall be pointless
Srpsko crnogorske igrice, kako možeš nekom predlagati razmjenu teritorija a kad ovaj to odbije, tvrditi da je to tvoj teritorij?
Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by L'enfant_terrible
Ovaj topic je jako opasan i predlazem da ga zakljucate, jer jedino sto ce se iskristalisati i postici je povecanje straha i neprijateljstva prema jednom dijelu crnogorskih gradjana.
Bookmarks