¹ The following account is based on Whitacker’s Almanac 1992, at 877–78 (1991); Fischer Almanach 1992, at 90–92 (1991); and 1990–92 Keesing’s Contemporary Archive.

² Boyes & Trevisan, Serbian Leader Puts Fate of His Party Before Nation, The Times (London) [hereinafter The Times], Mar. 18, 1991, at 7.

³ Id.

⁴ Tanner, Yugoslav Army Breaks Contact With Presidency, Independent, Mar. 19, 1991, at 11.

⁵ Croatian Leader Warns of Crisis, Int’l Herald Trib., May 15, 1991, at 2.

⁶ Binder, US Quietly Suspended Aid to Yugoslavia, Int’l Herald Trib., May 20, 1991, at 1.

⁷ Baker Backing for United Yugoslavia, Fin. Times (London), June 22/23, 1991, at 2.

⁸ Silber, Yugoslav PM Pleads with Rebel Republics, Fin. Times, June 25, 1991, at 2.

⁹ Sudetic, Yugoslavia Breaks Apart, 2 Rebel Republics Secede, Int’l Herald Trib., June 26, 1991, at 1; Trevisan, Rebel Republics Announce Break With Belgrade, The Times, June 26, 1991, at 9; Tanner, Slovenia and Croatia Secede, Independent, June 26, 1991, at 1.

¹⁰ Tanner, ‘Slovenia is Now at War,’ Independent, June 28, 1991, at 1; ‘Slovenia is at War’ Defense Chief Says as Fighting Spreads, Int’l Herald Trib., June 28, 1991, at 1.

¹¹ The troika was composed of the Foreign Minister of the state holding the presidency, and his predecessor and successor as President of the EC Council. It operates within the framework of “European Political Co-operation” or EPC, in accordance with title II of the Single European Act, Feb. 17 and 28, 1986, reprinted in 25 ILM 503 (1986). EPC promotes the adoption of common positions and common actions by the member states on foreign policy issues. See P. J. G. Kapteyn & P. V. Van Themaat, Introduction to the Law of the European Communities after the Coming into Force of the Single European Act 23–24 (2d ed. 1989). Following the practice of the press releases of the European Commission, EPC activities are considered part of the general framework of the Community and are therefore subsumed under the abbreviation “EC.”

¹² EC Comm’n, Week in Europe, July 4, 1991.

¹³ Id.

¹⁴ Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, Final Act, Aug. 1, 1975, 73 Dep’t St. Bull. 323 (1975), reprinted in 14 ILM 1292 (1975).

¹⁵ This principle does not, of course, necessarily apply in the colonial context.

¹⁶ Quoted in Wise & Helm, New-look CSCE’s First Test, Independent, June 28, 1991, at 13.

¹⁷ At the time, there were 35 members. Albania made up for the one member lost because of German unification. By the time of writing, CSCE membership had climbed to 52.

¹⁸ Charter of Paris for a New Europe, UN Doc. A/45/859, at 20 (1990), and Supplementary Document to Give Effect to Certain Provisions Contained in the Charter of Paris for a New Europe, id. at 43, 47 [hereinafter Paris Charter Supplementary Document], both reprinted in 30 ILM 190 (1991).

¹⁹ Chairman’s Statement on the results of the Meeting of the Consultative Committee of the Con flict Prevention Centre (July 1, 1991) (text supplied by Austrian Foreign Ministry).

²⁰ Paris Charter Supplementary Document, supra note 18, sec. 1(B); and Summary of Conclusions of the Berlin Meeting of the Council, including Arrangements for Consultation in Emergency Situa tions and Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, Ann. 2 (June 21, 1991), reprinted in 30 ILM 1348, 1353 (1991).

²¹ Urgent Appeal for a Cease-Fire (Prague, July 3, 1991) (text supplied by Austrian Foreign Min istry).

²² Summary of Conclusions, supra note 20, Ann. 2, para. 2.13, at 1355: “In light of its assessment of the situation, the meeting may agree on recommendations or conclusions to arrive at a solution.”

²³ Offer of CSCE Good Offices Mission to Yugoslavia (Prague, July 4, 1991) (text supplied by Austrian Foreign Ministry).

²⁴ Mission to Yugoslavia (Prague, July 4, 1991) (text supplied by Austrian Foreign Ministry).

²⁵ Drozdiak, EC Halts Arms Sales to Aid Yugoslavia, Int’l Herald Trib., July 6–7, 1991, at 1.

²⁶ Yugoslav Pact Gives Slovenes Border Control, Frees POWs, Int’l Herald Trib., July 9, 1991, at 1.

²⁷ See Buchan, EC’s Motley Monitoring Force Heads for Zagreb, Fin. Times, July 17, 1991, at 2.

²⁸ Tanner, Slovenian MP’s Accept EC Peace Plan, Independent, July 11, 1991, at 14; McElvoy, Slovenes Vote to Ratify Ceasefire Agreement, The Times, July 11, 1991, at 11.

²⁹ Sober, Creen Light for Slovene Independence, Fin. Times, July 20, 1991, at 2.

³⁰ Text supplied by the EC Commission.

³¹ Address of Dr Borislav Jovic in the Assembly of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Mar. 19, 1992), reprinted in Rev. Int’l Aff. (Belgrade), Apr. 1, 1991, at 11–12.

³² Quoted in Crawshaw & Tanner, Yugoslav Civil War Spreads, Independent, Aug. 2, 1991, at 1.

³³ Binyon & Dejevsky, EC Steps Up Calls for Intervention as More Croats Die, The Times, Aug. 3, 1991, at 7; Helm & Tanner, EC Force for Yugoslavia Closer, Independent, Aug. 3, 1991, at 1; Gardner & Silber, France Seeks Yugoslav Force, Fin. Times, Aug. 6, 1991, at 1.

³⁴ Helm & Tanner, supra note 33, at 1. The WEU, the third European institution involved in the crisis, was expected to coordinate a possible military deployment.

³⁵ Gardner & Dempsey, Soviets Warn Over Yugoslavia, Fin. Times, Aug. 7, 1991, at 1. At the time, of course, the USSR was still attempting to preserve its own integrity against challenges from the Baltic States and other entities.

³⁶ Jacobson & Murray, France Will Support Peace Force Only if Warring Sides Agree, The Times, Sept. 18, 1991, at 12.

³⁷ Usborne, Eisenhammer & Marshall, Europe Split on Military Force, Independent, Sept. 18, 1991, at 9.

³⁸ Brook & Trevisan, Hurd Halts EC Troops Plan for Yugoslavia, The Times, Sept. 20, 1991, at 1; EC Stalls on Peace Force for Croatia, Int’l Herald Trib., Sept. 20, 1991, at 1.

³⁹ UN is Asked to Help in Yugoslavia, Int’l Herald Trib., Sept. 21–22, 1991, at 5.

⁴⁰ Trevisan, Yugoslav Tanks Pour into Croatia, The Times, Sept. 21, 1991, at 1.

⁴¹ EPC Declaration of 27 August 1991 (Brussels), EPC Press Release 82/91 (emphasis added).

⁴² Id.

⁴³ Agreement on Cease-Fire (Sept. 1, 1991) (text provided by EC Comm’n).

⁴⁴ Initially, the mandate of the force was only to last until October 13, 1991, three months after signature of the first Memorandum of Understanding.

⁴⁵ Memorandum of Understanding on the Extension of Monitoring Activities of the Monitor Mis sion to Yugoslavia, Art. VI (Sept. 1, 1991) (text supplied by EC Comm’n).

⁴⁶ Supra note 41.

⁴⁷ Extraordinary EPC Meeting, Declaration on Yugoslavia (The Hague, Sept. 3, 1991), EPC Press Release (Sept. 4, 1991).

⁴⁸ Tanner, Yugoslavs Arrive for Peace Talks, Independent, Sept. 7, 1991, at 9; Goldsmith, EC Will Go Ahead On Yugoslav Talks Despite Fighting, Int’l Herald Trib., Sept. 7–8, 1991, at 1; Brock, Warlords Lead Yugoslavia Out of Mediators’ Reach, The Times, Sept. 9, 1991, at 9; Champion, Peace Efforts Fail to Halt Croatian Toll, Independent, Sept. 9, 1991, at 1; Serbian Rebels and Army Units Tighten Grip in Eastern Croatia, Int’l Herald Trib., Sept. 9, 1991, at 1.

⁴⁹ Letter of Sept. 19, 1991, UN Doc. S/23052.

⁵⁰ Letter of Sept. 19, 1991, UN Doc. S/23053.

⁵¹ Letter of Sept. 20, 1991, UN Doc. S/23057.

⁵² Letter of Sept. 24, 1991, UN Doc. S/23069.

⁵³ UN Doc. S/23067 (Sept. 25, 1991).

⁵⁴ UN Doc. S/PV.3009, at 7 (Sept. 25, 1991).

⁵⁵ Id. at 11.

⁵⁶ Id. at 17.

⁵⁷ Id. at 22. Chapter VIII concerns regional agreements or agencies for dealing with such matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security as are appropriate for regional action. UN Charter Art. 52.

⁵⁸ UN Doc. S/PV.3009, at 25 (1991).

⁵⁹ Id. at 27.

⁶⁰ Id. at 32.

⁶¹ Id. at 46.

⁶² Id. at 59–60.

⁶³ Id. at 36.

⁶⁴ Id. at 37 (emphasis added).

⁶⁵ Id. at 38.

⁶⁶ Id. at 64.

⁶⁷ Id. at 53.

⁶⁸ Id. at 57.

⁶⁹ Id. at 58.

⁷⁰ Id. at 59.

⁷¹ The ambiguity lay in the fact that the wording could be interpreted to refer to a prospective threat to peace that would come about if the situation continued.

⁷² The principle is not directly mentioned in the Charter, but it is mentioned in General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV) (Oct. 24, 1970) on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, which is often seen to constitute an authoritative and authentic interpretation of it: “The territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from the threat or use of force. No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal.”

⁷³ SC Res. 713 (Sept. 25, 1991).

⁷⁴ SC Res. 688 (Apr. 5, 1991).

⁷⁵ Indeed, reference is made to UN member states, although the substance of the provision is of course universally applicable by way of general custom, or even as a jus cogens obligation.

⁷⁶ Statement of the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/22133 (1991); see also UN Doc. S/PV.2974 (1991).

⁷⁷ SCRes. 733 (Jan. 25, 1992).

⁷⁸ The following account is based on the Vance report, Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Paragraph 3 of Security Council Resolution 713 (1991), UN Doc. S/23169 (1991). Mesic’s “private’ visit took place on September 29, 1991. Id., para. 4.

⁷⁹ Under the initial cease-fire agreements negotiated at Brioni, implementation of the independ ence declarations of June 25 had been temporarily suspended. Brock & Trevisan, Ceasefire as Croats Declare Independence, The Times, Oct. 9, 1991, at 1.

⁸⁰ UN Doc. S/23169, supra note 78, paras. 21, 31.

⁸¹ Id., paras. 15–18, and Ann. IV. This figure later rose to 600,000. UN News Summary, Jan. 1–8, 1992, UN Doc. NS/1/92.

⁸² UN Doc. S/23169, supra note 78, Ann. II.

⁸³ Id., Ann. III.

⁸⁴ UN Doc. S/23169, supra note 78, para. 23.

⁸⁵ Id.

⁸⁶ Id., Ann. VI.

⁸⁷ EC Comm’n, Week in Europe, Oct. 31, 1991.

⁸⁸ Décision relative à la suspension de l’application des accords entre la Communauté européenne, ses Etats membres et la Yougoslavie (1991) (text supplied by EC Comm’n) (Research Centre trans.).

⁸⁹ Proposition de Règlement du Conseil relative au régime applicable aux importations de produits originaires des Républiques … (1991) (text supplied by EC Comm’n).

⁹⁰ Treaty Provisions for the Convention (1991) (text supplied by EC Comm’n).

⁹¹ EC Comm’n, Week in Europe, Nov. 7, 1991.

⁹² UN News Summary, Nov. 7–14, 1991, UN Doc. NS/41/91.

⁹³ Id., Oct. 31-Nov. 6, 1991, UN Doc. NS/40/91. The meaning of this statement is not entirely clear. If the Secretary-General was referring to economic sanctions, his views do not appear to be in line with legal requirements. While no state may lawfully refuse to implement binding sanctions adopted under chapter VII of the UN Charter and having universal applicability, the imposition of further and more stringent economic sanctions by individual states, groups of states or regional organizations would not be precluded if they were justifiable in general international law. Perhaps the Secretary-General was referring to the possibility of military intervention without UN authorization.

⁹⁴ UN Doc. S/23239, annex (1991).

⁹⁵ CSO Res., Support for United Nations Action on Yugoslavia (Prague, Nov. 29, 1991) (text supplied by Austrian Foreign Ministry).

⁹⁶ McElvoy & Trevisan, LW Given an Ultimatum on Troops for Yugoslavia, The Times, Nov. 13, 1991, at 13.

⁹⁷ Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 721 (1991), UN Doc. S/23280, Ann. III (1991).

⁹⁸ SC Res. 724 (Dec. 15, 1991).

⁹⁹ Id. On February 7, 1992, the Security Council committee established pursuant to Resolution 724 (1991) transmitted an appeal to all states requesting that they forward to it any information they might have relating to violations of the mandatory arms embargo. UN News Summary, Feb. 6–13, 1992, UN Doc. NS/6/92.

¹⁰⁰ SC Res. 727 (Jan. 8, 1992).

¹⁰¹ Further Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Resolution 721 (1991), UN Doc. S/23363 (1992). The strength of the liaison mission was increased to 75 officers in Resolution 740 (Feb. 4, 1992).

¹⁰² UN News Summary, Jan. 9–17, 1992, UN Doc. NS/2/92.

¹⁰³ Phillips, Renegade Serbs Resist UN Troops, The Times, Jan. 27, 1992, at 10; Judah, UN Talks Raise Hopes of Peace Deal in Croatia, The Times, Jan. 28, 1992, at 10; Serb in Croatia Deals UN Peace Plan a Setback, Int’l Herald Trib., Jan. 29, 1992, at 2; Factions ‘Not Ready for UN Peace Force,’ The Times, Jan. 30, 1992, at 8.

¹⁰⁴ Further Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 721 (1991), UN Doc. S/23513 (1992).

¹⁰⁵ Id., para. 13. 106

¹⁰⁶ Further Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 721 (1991), UN Doc. S/23592, Ann. III (1992).

¹⁰⁷ UN Doc. S/23592, supra note 106, para. 6.

¹⁰⁸ Id., para. 28. On Krajina, see Letter dated 11 February from the President of the State Committee for Co-operation with the United Nations addressed to the Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General for Yugoslavia, id., Ann. IV.

¹⁰⁹ On March 19, the General Assembly approved the appropriation of $250 million for the initial expenses of UNPROFOR. UN News Summary, Mar. 13–19, 1992, UN Doc. NS/11/92.

¹¹⁰ Id., Feb. 27-Mar. 4, 1992, UN Doc. NS/9/92; and id., Mar. 5–12, 1992, UN Doc. NS/10/92.

¹¹¹ Further Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 749 (1992), UN Doc. S/23844 (1992).

¹¹² Id.

¹¹³ Statement by the Presidency on the Recognition of Yugoslav Republics (Brussels, Jan. 15, 1992), EPC Press Release 9/92. The Ukraine, then itself not a recognized state, had already recognized Slovenia and Croatia on December 12, 1991. Ukraine Recognizes Croatia and Slovenia, Int’l Herald Trib., Dec. 13, 1991, at 4. The Vatican recognized both entities on January 13, 1992. Cowell, Vatican Nod to Slovenes and Croats, Int’l Herald Trib., Jan. 14, 1992, at 1.

¹¹⁴ EPC Press Release 9/92, supra note 113.

¹¹⁵ Germany and Austria had indicated their desire for early recognition as far back as July 1991. Rebel Republics Drawing Support from More Nations, Int’l Herald Trib., July 5, 1991, at 4; McElvoy, Bonn and Vienna Take Firm Line on Yugoslav Conflict, The Times, Aug. 27, 1991, at 9. On September 4, Chancellor Helmut Kohl said in the German Parliament: “When dialogue and harmonious coexistence are no longer possible, we must, in line with our understanding of the right to self-determination, consider … recognizing under international law those republics which no longer wish to belong to Yugoslavia.” (Unofficial trans.; text provided by German Embassy, London.)

¹¹⁶ Monitors for EC Say Recognition of Croatia Could Worsen the War, Int’l Herald Trib., Dec. 12, 1991, at 2; Barber, Bonn Urged to Delay Recognition of Croatia, Independent, Dec. 13, 1991, at 12; Trevisan, UN Chief Fights to Hold Off Recognition, The Times, Dec. 13, 1991, at 10; Defying UN, Bonn Nears Recognition of Yugoslav States, Int’l Herald Trib., Dec. 14–15, 1991, at 6.

¹¹⁷ Letter dated 10 December 1991 from the Secretary-General of the United Nations addressed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, reproduced in Report of the Secretary-General, supra note 97, Ann. IV.

¹¹⁸ Unofficial translation, furnished by the German Permanent Mission to the United Nations.

¹¹⁹ EPC Press Release 128/91 (Dec. 16, 1991).

¹²⁰ EPC Press Release 129/91 (Dec. 16, 1991).

¹²¹ Id.

¹²² E.g., Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States, Dec. 26, 1933, 165 LNTS 19, Art. 1: “The State as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with other States.”

¹²³ This fact is evidenced, of course, by the fact that, in addition to the general guidelines that were to apply to Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, more specific provisions were added with respect to the former Yugoslav republics, relating in particular to the provisions of the Carrington peace plan.

¹²⁴ The EC statement concerning conditions of recognition, supra note 119, ended with the follow ing paragraph: “The commitment to these principles opens the way to recognition by the Community and its member States and to the establishment of diplomatic relations.”

¹²⁵ Lambert, Bridge & Tanner, Serbia Says EC Erased Yugoslavia From Map, Independent, Dec. 18, 1991, at 8.

¹²⁶ Kinzer, Bonn Grants Recognition to Croatia and Slovenia, Int’l Herald Trib., Dec. 24–25, 1991, at 1. Germany immediately communicated its decision of December 23 to Slovenia and Croatia but only “implemented” it on January 15, 1992, when consulates in Zagreb and Ljubljana were upgraded to embassies. See 1991 Bulletin des Presse- und Informationsamtes der Bundesregierung 1174 (remarks of the Chancellor and Foreign Minister).

¹²⁷ See text at note 42 supra.

¹²⁸ Opening statement of Lord Carrington at the 10th Plenary Session of the EC Conference on Yugoslavia, para. 16 (Brussels, Mar. 9, 1992) (text supplied by EC Comm’n).

¹²⁹ Id. (quoting Conference for Peace in Yugoslavia, Arbitration Commission Avis No. 1 (Dec. 7, 1991)). The unofficial English versions of all other findings of the Arbitration Commission cited hereinafter were provided by the Research Centre.

¹³⁰ Avis No. 3, para. 1 (Jan. 11, 1992) (texts of all avis cited here supplied by EC Comm’n).

¹³¹ Id., para. 2. For the Convention, Aug. 22,1978, see 3 United Nations Conference on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties, Official Documents, UN Sales No. F.79.U.10 (1979).

¹³² Of course, it could be argued that these rights were in existence and were being violated. In that case, the Baltic entities lacked a forum within which to vindicate their rights, owing to a lack of diplomatic relations.

¹³³ Avis No. 3, supra note 130, para. 2:

A défaut d’un accord contraire, les limites antérieures acquierènt le caractère de frontières protégées par le droit international. Telle est la conclusion à laquelle conduit le principe de respect du statu quo territorial et particulièrement celui de l’uti possidetis juris qui, bien qu’initialement reconnu dans le règlement des problèmes de décolonisation en Amérique et en Afrique, constitue aujourd’hui un principe présentant un caractère général comme l’a déclaré la Cour internationale de Justice … .

The commission then quoted Frontier Dispute (Burk. Faso/Mali), 1986 ICJ Rep. 554, 565, para. 20 (Judgment of Dec. 22).

¹³⁴ Avis No. 3, supra note 130, para. 2.

¹³⁵ Position of the SFRY Presidency on the Question of Internal Borders in Yugoslavia (Jan. 3, 1992) (text provided by Yugoslav Embassy, London).

¹³⁶ Id.

¹³⁷ Id.

¹³⁸ Avis No. 2 (Jan. 11, 1992).

¹³⁹ Id.

¹⁴⁰ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, 999 UNTS 171; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, 993 UNTS 3.

¹⁴¹ Avis No. 2, supra note 138, para. 3: “son appartenance à la communauté ethnique, religieuse ou linguistique de son choix.”

¹⁴² Id.: “sur la base d’accords entre les Républiques, les membres des populations serbes de Bosnie-Herzégovine et de Croatie puissent … se voir reconnaitre la nationalité de leur choix avec tous les droits, et toutes les obligations en découlant à l’égard de tous les Etats concernés.”

¹⁴³ Id., para. 4: (1) “que les populations serbes de Bosnie-Herzégovine et de Croatie ont le droit de bénéficier de tous les droits reconnus aux minorités et aux groupes ethniques par le droit international et par les dispositions du projet de Convention de la Conférence pour la paix en Yougoslavie”; and (2) 𠇈que ces Républiques doivent faire bénéficier les membres de ces minorités et de ces groupes ethniques de l’ensemble des droits de l’homme et des libertes fondamentales reconnus par le droit international, y compris, le cas échéant, le droit de choisir leur nationalité.”

¹⁴⁴ Avis No. 4, para. 4 (Jan. 11, 1992): “l’expression de la volonté des populations de Bosnie-Herzégovine de constituer la R.S.B.H. en Etat souverain et indépendant ne peut être considérée comme pleinement établie.”

¹⁴⁵ Judah, Bosnia Leader Warns Serbs to Respect Vote Verdict, The Times, Mar. 4, 1992, at 8.

¹⁴⁶ EPC Declaration on Yugoslavia (Brussels, Apr. 6, 1992), EPC Press Release 40/92; see also Goldsmith, EC, Hoping to End Fighting, Recognizes Bosnia-Hercegovina, Int’l Herald Trib., Apr. 7, 1992, at 1; Jackson & Lambert, Bosnian Freedom Wins EC Support, Independent, Apr. 7, 1992, at 15; Brock & Judah, EC Recognises Bosnia as Gun Battles Rage, The Times, Apr. 7, 1992, at 1. The hostilities that ensued will be discussed in text following note 172 infra.

¹⁴⁷ Letter to Robert Badinter, President of the Arbitration Commission (Jan. 11, 1992) (text supplied by EC Comm’n).

¹⁴⁸ Avis No. 5, para. 3 (Jan. 11, 1992).

¹⁴⁹ Letter to Robert Badinter, President of the Arbitration Commission (Jan. 15, 1992) (text sup plied by EC Comm’n).

¹⁵⁰ The Macedonian electorate, in a referendum of September 9, 1991, had opted for independ ence by a majority of 74%.

¹⁵¹ Avis No. 6, para. 5 (Jan. 11, 1992): Macedonia “a renoncé à toute revendication territoriale quelle qu’elle soit, dans des declarations sans ambiguité et ayant force obligatoire en droit international; … dès lors, l’utilisation du nom de ‘Macédoine’ ne saurait impliquer aucune revendication territoriale è l’égard d’un autre Etat.”

¹⁵² Greece had campaigned vigorously against recognition, arguing that the name “Macedonia” implied that the new state would advance territorial claims against northern Greece—an area also known as Macedonia.

¹⁵³ EPC Informal Meeting of Ministers for Foreign Affairs, Declaration on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Guimaraes, May 1–2, 1992), EPC Press Release 53/92.

¹⁵⁴ July 1, 1968, 21 UST 483, TIAS No. 6839, 729 UNTS 161.

¹⁵⁵ Text supplied by embassy of the “Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,” London.

¹⁵⁶ Statement of Vladislav Jovanovic (Mar. 9, 1992), Rev. Int’l Aff. (Belgrade), Apr. 1, 1992, at 14, 15.

¹⁵⁷ Silber & Buchan, Serbs Proclaim new Yugoslavia, Fin. Times, Apr. 28, 1992, at 2; Barber, West Cool on Serbia’s ‘New Yugoslavia,’ Independent, Apr. 28, 1992, at 11; Harden, Belgrade Proclaims a New Yugoslavia, Int’l Herald Trib., Apr. 28, 1992, at 2; Reviasand & Judah, Nations Boycott Ceremony Marking Birth of a Third Yugoslavia, The Times, Apr. 28, 1992, at 9.

¹⁵⁸ US/EC Declaration on the Recognition of the Yugoslav Republics (Brussels, Mar. 10, 1992), Rev. Int’l Aff. (Belgrade), Apr. 1, 1992, at 17.

¹⁵⁹ See text at and note 185 infra.

¹⁶⁰ Doyle, Belgrade Ploy Blocked, Independent, May 6, 1992, at 10.

¹⁶¹ UN Press Release SG/SM/4692, SC/5362 (Jan. 31, 1992).

¹⁶² Decision by the Council of Heads of State of the Commonwealth of Independent States (Dec. 21, 1991), reprinted in 31 ILM 151 (1992). The commentary to the ILC draft on succession of states in respect of treaties indicates that questions of membership are exempted from a possible general rule of automatic membership in multilateral treaties by successor states in cases of postcolonial secession. 3 United Nations Conference on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties, supra note 131, at 9.

¹⁶³ See text at notes 145–46. During the night of January 25/26, 1992, the Bosnian-Hercegovinan parliament had decided to hold a referendum on independence in early spring. Judah, Bosnia to Hold Vote on Independence, The Times, Jan. 27, 1992, at 10. The Serbian representatives in parliament boycotted the vote, which apparently was still valid under applicable constitutional law. On February 24, Muslim and Croatian representatives in Bosnia-Hercegovina called on the JNA to withdraw from the territory. “If Yugoslavia does not exist any more, there can be no Yugoslav army,” a senior member of Bosnia’s Croatian Democratic Union reportedly said. According to news reports, a senior Muslim deputy added that “the Yugoslav People’s Army [JNA] has to leave Bosnia-Hercegovina after it proclaims its independence, and if it does not do so, we will regard it as an occupying force.” Heritage, Bosnian Leaders Call on Yugoslav Army to Leave, Independent, Feb. 25, 1992, at 8.

¹⁶⁴ Judah & Bone, Sarajevo Erupts After Vote for Independence, The Times, Mar. 3, 1992, at 1; Tanner, Bosnia on Brink of Civil War, Independent, Mar. 3, 1992, at 1.

¹⁶⁵ Judah, Bosnia Launches All-out Effort for Recognition, The Times, Mar. 7, 1992, at 9.

¹⁶⁶ Palmer, US Forces Early Move on Bosnia, Guardian, Mar. 10, 1992, at 8.

¹⁶⁷ US/EC Declaration, supra note 158.

¹⁶⁸ Statement of Principles for New Constitutional Arrangements for Bosnia and Hercegovina, Rev. Int’l Aff. (Belgrade), Apr. 1, 1992, at 15. See also Crawshaw, Bosnia’s Ethnic Leaders Agree a Three-way Split, Independent, Mar. 19, 1992, at 15; New Pact Calls for Ethnic Split in Bosnia, Int’l Herald Trio., Mar. 19, 1992, at 4; United Kingdom, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Press Release (Mar. 19, 1992).

¹⁶⁹ Bosnia Serbs Opt for Own Constitution, Independent, Mar. 28, 1992, at 15.

¹⁷⁰ Violence Flares in Bosnia Before EC Vote on Recognition, Int’l Herald Trib., Apr. 6, 1992, at 4.

¹⁷¹ EPC Declaration on Yugoslavia, supra note 146.

¹⁷² Id.

¹⁷³ EC Comm’n, Week in Europe, Apr. 9, 1992.

¹⁷⁴ Tanner, Bosnia Declares State of Emergency as Civil War Looms, Independent, Apr. 9, 1992, at 10; Tanner, Sarajevo Panic as Town Falls to Serbian Militia, Independent, Apr. 10, 1992, at 15.

¹⁷⁵ Judah, Embattled Bosnia Appeals to World as Bombing Continues, The Times, Apr. 11, 1992, at 12.

¹⁷⁶ EPC Statement on Bosnia-Hercegovina (Apr. 11, 1992), EPC Press Release 46/92.

¹⁷⁷ Rival Groups Agree to Ceasefire After EC Talks, The Times, Apr. 13, 1992, at 11; Truce Arranged in Bosnia-Hercegovina, Int’l Herald Trib., Apr. 13, 1992, at 2.

¹⁷⁸ Hungary & Austria, Aide-Mémoire, submitted to delegations at CSCE follow-up meeting (Helsinki, Apr. 10, 1992) (text supplied by Austrian Foreign Ministry).

¹⁷⁹ “Yugoslavia,” Aide-Mémoire, submitted to delegations at CSCE follow-up meeting (Helsinki, Apr. 12, 1992) (text supplied by Austrian Foreign Ministry).

¹⁸⁰ Statement Adopted by the Representatives of the CSCE Participating States, Meeting in a Ple nary Session of the Helsinki Follow-up Meeting (Apr. 15, 1992) (text supplied by CSCE Press Office, Helsinki).

¹⁸¹ Republic of Serbia, Ministry of Information, Press Release (Apr. 24, 1992).

¹⁸² See, e.g., GA Res. 290 (IV) (Dec. 1, 1949); GA Res. 380 (V) (Nov. 17, 1950); GA Res. 2131 (XX) (Dec. 21, 1965); GA Res. 2625 (XXV), supra note 72; GA Res. 3314 (XXIX) (Dec. 14, 1974); GA Res. 36/103 (Dec. 9, 1981); see also Pan-American Convention on Duties and Rights of States in the Event of Civil Strife, Feb. 20, 1928, reprinted in 1 The Inter-American System, pt. 2 at 289 (F. V. García-Amador ed. 1983); and Res. III of the Wiesbaden session, 1975 Institut de Droit International, Annuaire 545.

¹⁸³ EPC Statement on Bosnia and Hercegovina (Apr. 16, 1992), EPC Press Release 51/92.

¹⁸⁴ See text at note 155 supra.

¹⁸⁵ CSCE Participating States, Decision of May 1, 1992. Bosnia-Hercegovina, like Croatia and Slovenia, had been admitted to membership in the CSCE.

¹⁸⁶ Statement on the Situation in Bosnia-Hercegovina to the Plenary Session of the Helsinki Followup Meeting by the United States Representative, Ambassador John C. Kornblum (May 6, 1992) (text provided by CSCE Press Office, Helsinki).

¹⁸⁷ Id.

¹⁸⁸ Statement on the Situation in Bosnia-Hercegovina to the Plenary Session of the Helsinki Follow-up Meeting by the Delegation of Romania (May 6, 1992) (text supplied by CSCE Press Office, Hel sinki).

¹⁸⁹ CSCE CSO, Declaration on Bosnia-Hercegovina (Helsinki, May 12, 1992) (text supplied by CSCE Press Office, Helsinki).

¹⁹⁰ UN News Summary, Apr. 8–14, 1992, UN Doc. NS/15/92.

¹⁹¹ 3 Sides in Sarajevo Sign a Cease-Fire, Int’l Herald Trib., Apr. 24, 1992, at 4.

¹⁹² Tanner, Bosnia Ceasefire Crumbles, Independent, Apr. 24, 1992, at 1; Bosnian Ceasefire broken, The Times, Apr. 24, 1992, at 1.

¹⁹³ Eisenhammer, Bonn Looks for Speedy Action Against Serbia, Independent, Apr. 24, 1992, at 8 (convening the Council had been proposed by Germany and the Netherlands).

¹⁹⁴ Further Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 749 (1992), UN Doc. S/23844, para. 18 (1992).

¹⁹⁵ Id., para. 7. See also his earlier report of the same date, UN Doc. S/23836 (1992).

¹⁹⁶ UN Press Release SC/5398 (Apr. 24, 1992). The latter paragraph fell short of the wording in Resolution 688 (Apr. 5, 1991), reprinted in 30 ILM 858 (1991), concerning the repression of the Iraqi civilian population in the aftermath of the gulf conflict. There the Council had insisted on “immediate access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in all parts of Iraq and to make available all necessary facilities for their operations.” Of course, the text on Yugoslavia was not a formal resolution.

¹⁹⁷ Less than a week after the EC decision to recognize, followed by an indication by the United States that it would do so, Bosnia-Hercegovina was also recognized by Finland, Czechoslovakia, Hun gary arid Poland. Judah, Embattled Bosnia Appeals to World as Bombing Continues, The Times, Apr. 11, 1992, at 12.

¹⁹⁸ Presidents of the Republics of Slovenia, Macedonia and Croatia, Urgent Appeal to the European Community and to the UN Security Council Concerning the Grave Humanitarian Problems in Bosnia and Hercegovina and Croatia, submitted to the CSCE plenary through the Slovenian delegation (Brussels, Mar. 6, 1992) (text supplied by CSCE Press Office, Helsinki).

¹⁹⁹ Id.

²⁰⁰ Id.

²⁰¹ UN Press Release SG/1926 (Apr. 29, 1992).

²⁰² UN Bosnia Envoy Rules Out Immediate Use of Peacekeepers, Int’l Herald Trib., May 7, 1992, at 2; Judah, UN Envoy’s Car Hit by Sniper Fire in Sarajevo, The Times, May 7, 1992, at 10; Barber, Shooting Punctures Bosnia Ceasefire, Independent, May 7, 1992, at 14.

²⁰³ Further Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 749 (1992), UN Doc. S/23900 (1992).

²⁰⁴ EC Comm’n, Week in Europe, May 7, 1992; Barber, EC Monitors Abandon Shattered Sarajevo, Independent, May 6, 1992, at 10. A Belgian member of the EC monitoring mission had died as a result of the hostilities in Bosnia-Hercegovina. EPC Press Release 54/92 (May 4, 1992); Silber, UN Peacekeepers Pull Out of Sarajevo, Fin. Times, May 18, 1992, at 5.

²⁰⁵ Further Report of the Secretary-General, supra note 203, para. 5.

²⁰⁶ Id., para. 12.

²⁰⁷ Id., para. 25.

²⁰⁸ See, e.g., Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), 1971 ICJ Rep. 16, 52–54 (Advisory Opinion of June 21); R. Sonnenfeld, Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council 133 (1987); M. Kroekel, Die Bindungswirking von Resolutionen des Sicherheitsrates der Vereinten Nationen Gegenüber Mitgliedsstaaten 137 (1977); Higgins, The Advisory Opinion on Namibia: Which UN Resolutions Are Binding under Article 25 of the Charter?, 21 Int’l & Comp. L.Q. 270 (1972); D. W. Bowett, United Nations Forces 281 (1964); J. Stone, Legal Controls of International Conflicts 220 (1954).

²⁰⁹ See SC Res. 751 (Apr. 24, 1992) (on Somalia); Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 752 (1992), UN Doc. S/2400 (1992) (on humanitarian forces); UN Press Release SC/5414 (May 30, 1992) (on sanctions); EC Council, Measures Affecting Serbia and Montenegro, EC Press Release (June 4, 1992).

²¹⁰ The WEU and NATO, which might be expected to develop into the military arm of the EC and the CSCE, respectively, remained substantially uninvolved.

²¹¹ In addition to lacking an institutional and logistical structure to mount such an operation, the EC and CSCE were considered politically biased by the Serbian factions.

²¹² Fundamental rights of pre-state entities have of course been recognized in a colonial context. See, e.g., SC Res. 389 (Apr. 22, 1976) (reaffirming inalienable right of people of East Timor to self-determination and independence).

²¹³ If recognition were seen to be constitutive, its refusal would have implied that new states had not yet been created; but the emerging entities would nevertheless have remained under the protection of these fundamental rights. The result would be the same.

This author’s preference for the declaratory theory in cases of positive recognition does not deny the fact that active nonrecognition of the results of certain activities of states (as opposed to a simple failure to recognize them) can highlight the legal implications of such situations.

²¹⁴ I owe this point to a conversation with Mr. Christopher Greenwood.

²¹⁵ An example is the recent agreement between the Government of Mali and the nomadic population of northern Mali, which specifically grants “decentralized” administration rather than autonomous administration, to avoid creating a future claim to secession. See S. M. Touré, La Question du Nord au Mali, 4 Afr. Soc’y Int’l L., Proc. (African Society of International and Comparative Law, forthcoming 1992). On the other hand, the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma embraced a future federal constitution for Burma in a constitutional conference held June 11–18, 1992, in Thailand. By committing themselves to a federal draft constitution, the formerly secessionist nationalities within Burma and the elected opposition government agreed, the nationalities had acted in exercise of the right to self-determination and had precluded a right to secession in the future.