KOSOVO: GOS ASKS FOR OUR SUPPORT WITH UNESCO

UNCLAS BELGRADE 001063

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O.12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM SR MW YI
SUBJECT: KOSOVO: GOS ASKS FOR OUR SUPPORT WITH UNESCO



1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Serbian Presidential advisor Ambassador Dusan
Batakovic requested UNMIK and Contact Group support for the GOS
effort to name three Serbian Orthodox religious sites in Kosovo as
UNESCO protected buildings during the bodyQs July 8 Q 16 meeting in
Vilnius. Batakovic expressed his hope that this protection and
other assurances for the Kosovo Serbs will deter their exodus if
Kosovo becomes independent. END SUMMARY.


2. (SBU) Advisor to President Tadic and member of the GOSQ Kosovo
status negotiating team Ambassador Dusan Batakovic told poloff on
June 27 that he hopes UNMIK and the Contact Group countries will
support the GOSQs effort to name three Serbian Orthodox religious
sites in Kosovo as UNESCO protected buildings during the bodyQs July
8 Q 16 meeting in Vilnius. These sites are:
- the Pec Patriarchate;
- the Gracanica monastery;
- the Cathedral Church in Prizren.


3. (U) Batakovic said the plan is Qof utmost importanceQ to Serbia
and is a way of protecting the Qmost important 14th century
buildings in southeastern EuropeQ and said he expected no objection
from Albanians. In fact, he said the Albanians would gain from
having UNESCO sites Qregardless of outcomeQ of Kosovo status talks
as the religious sites would be sources of tourism revenue.
Batakovic clarified that the intent is to protect only the
buildings, not the lands around them, and said this is identical to
how the Decani monastery was included in July 2004. He added that
he did not expect the GOS to request protection by UNESCO for any
other sites in Kosovo in the future.


4. (U) While he did not expect opposition to this plan in Vilnius,
the sheer number of other sites from around the world up for
consideration requires the GOS to solicit support from member
nations to ensure the Kosovo sites are included. As a result, he
mentioned he had asked Acting SRSG Schook for UNMIKQs support and
that the GOS would be sending a letter to Contact Group foreign
ministries requesting the same. He said a joint letter from the
Contact Group to UNESCO would be an excellent show of support for
this initiative, and believed that the USG was the only Contact
Group member on the UNESCO board.


5. (SBU) Turning to Kosovo status, Batakovic said that the UNESCO
request along with ongoing decentralization plans are part of a
larger effort to ensure the future of Serbs in Kosovo. Kosovo Serbs
are QshakenQ due to recent violence against Serbs (he noted the
Klina shooting in particular as a Qpolitical killingQ to make Serbs
flee) and said they are not seeing any tangible results from the
negotiations. Prime Minister KostunicaQs June 28 trip to Kosovo in
honor of Vidov Dan (the 1389 Battle of Kosovo),Batakovic said, was
intended to show Kosovo Serbs that Belgrade is committed to them.
Batakovic said that the deputy head of the Russian Duma participated
Qpurely as an Orthodox representative.


6. (SBU) Regarding the June 20 UNSC meeting, Batakovic said that
outgoing SRSG PetersenQs report was QinaccurateQ and did not reflect
ground realities for Serbs. He confessed that CCK President
Raskovic-IvicQs report Qcould have been more conciliatoryQ but
reflected Qmore accurate statements.


7. (SBU) Ultimately, Batakovic said that Kosovo Serbs Qdesperately
need progressQ to remain in Kosovo, especially on Qa
decentralization plan which will survive any settlementQ in KosovoQs
final status. He said he only wants for Serbs in Kosovo to have the
Qsame as Albanians in Serbia or Macedonia.


8. (SBU) COMMENT: As we have heard from the PresidentQs office for
months, BatakovicQs statements reflect forward-looking intentions
limited by a paralyzing fear of the consequences of Qlosing Kosovo.
Batakovic said Qyou saw what happened to Djindjic when he took on
Milosevic, which was a small issue compared to Kosovo.Q We would of
course welcome USOP's views on this issue, but, from our vantage
point, we see no reason not to support the GOSQ plan to add these
historic sites to the UNESCO list -- especially if this can be
constructed as a joint GOS-PISG effort similar to the recent Returns
Protocol. END COMMENT.

POLT