CRO, FRY NORMALIZATION AGREEMENT IS RESULT OF COMPROMISE - GRANIC

ZAGREB, Sept 19 (Hina) - The Lower House of the Croatian parliament on Thursday continued a discussion on Foreign Minister Mate Granic's report on Croatia's international position and a bill on ratifying the Agreement on the Normalization of Relations Between Croatia and Yugoslavia. Explaining why the terms "aggression" and "aggressor" were absent from the Agreement, Granic said that only world wars ended with the victory of one side, whereas in local and regional wars the aggressor was never defined. The Agreement was a compromise between the two sides, it was achieved by combining diplomacy and the Croatian military power, Granic said. He added that for Croatia there was no doubt as to who the aggressor was, but it was necessary to take into consideration the international community and the fact that the agreement was signed by the other side too. Granic confirmed that there had been strong and continuous pressure on the part of the international community to sign the Agreement, but added that it had been achieved through direct negotiations, on Belgrade's initiative. Answering remarks as to why the Agreement was signed before the truth on missing persons was known, Granic agreed that it was most difficult to accept for those who had suffered, the invalids, the families of the missing and the imprisoned. However, he added, it was customary that the learning of truth on the missing and the imprisoned followed the signing of the Agreement. He also pointed out the importance of exhuming mass graves. According to the Agreement, the reintegration of the Croatian Danubian area was unquestionable and Croatia was firm in its stance that it should be completed in the set deadlines, Granic said. He added that according to the Erdut Agreement, each side could request the extension of UNTAES' mandate, but that the decision on it was up to the U.N. Security Council. Prevlaka was Croatia's oldest border (with Montenegro), indisputably Croatia's territory, which it would remain, Granic pointed out, adding that its mention in the Agreement was a result of compromise. The mention of state continuity made it impossible to accuse Croatia of secessionism, Granic pointed out, adding that there were no doubts concerning succession, because Belgrade had accepted the International Monetary Fund formula for the allocation of the former Yugoslavia's debt. Explaining the stance in relation to the return of Serb refugees and the Agreement's regulations regarding property, Granic announced that Croatia would demand compensation for property damaged in the war. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia would continue an active policy. Granic said there were many initiatives for the holding of "Dayton II" which would address the deficiencies of the Dayton Agreement and the presence of the international community in Bosnia after the elections. But "the formula of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a decentralized state, three constituent peoples and two entities, certainly won't change", the Croatian Foreign Minister concluded. (hina) ha jn 191659 MET sep 96