Open letter of Bishop Artemije to the Joachim Ruecker     
      The Orthodox Bishop 
of Ras-Prizren 
and Kosovo-Metohija

No: ______
Date: May 31, 2007
Prizren - Gracanica
 
An Open Letter
 
Joachim Ruecker
SRSG UN
PRISTINA
 
 Esteemed Mr. Rucker:
  
During our recent meeting in the Gracanica Monastery, you informed me that on 
January 29, 2007, on behalf of UMNIK, you signed with UNESCO the Agreement for 
the first project of the rehabilitation and preservation of the cultural 
heritage of Kosovo and Metohija, expressing your hope that it will serve as the 
model for other similar projects that will follow. 
     
We also learned that on September 2006, UNMIK and UNESCO signed the Memorandum 
of Mutual Understanding of the rehabilitation, protection, and preservation of 
the cultural heritage of Kosovo and Metohija.
  
When I inquired as to "which churches in Kosovo and Metohija, stipulated by 
this Agreement, does UNESCO refer to?", reminding you that I am the Bishop in 
charge of the Ras and Prizren Diocese, and that without my consent and approval 
no one can undertake any kind of works on any Serbian churches, you , together 
with your co-worker, Mr. Mikhail Krasnoshchekov , kindly responded that all 
that had already been arranged and confirmed by the Holy Synod of the Serbian 
Orthodox Church in Belgrade. 
  
After consulting with the Holy Synod, I came to the realization that your claim 
that "there had been an agreement with the Holy Synod of Bishops" does not in 
fact reflect the truth.
  
Even though I am familiar with your activities in Kosovo and Metohija, - your 
inclination and favouritism toward the Albanians, and your antagonistic 
attitude toward the Serbs, as well as your strong and persistent engagement in 
the promotion and realization of the lawless plan for an independent Kosovo - I 
was astounded with your boldness and readiness to falsify and distort the 
truth. I did not expect that anybody, not even you Mr. Ruecker, would dare to 
utter such falsehoods. Nevertheless, this has only unmasked your intentions and 
revealed your pro-Albanian leanings. Such misconduct on your part has 
obliterated all trust that existed between us.  
Perhaps we should simply view your activity in light of your countryman's 
statements, Germany's Ambassador Mr. Cobel, who recently used his ambassadorial 
position to express altogether inappropriate and deplorable insults at the 
Serbian people and State. 
Media coverage of UNMIK's press conference from January 29, 2007, mentions your 
statement that the signing of the aforementioned Agreement is "…enabling work 
to commence for the preservation of all types of heritage in Kosovo".
  
Your pretentiousness is truly beyond belief, Mr. Ruecker! Do you really think 
that the Serbian Church, the Serbian people, and the Serbian State were only 
waiting for you before commencing work on the preservation of its cultural 
heritage?  
  
Do we really need such lawless Agreements and Memoranda to enable work to 
commence for the preservation of what for centuries our ancestors had created, 
guarded, and passed down to us?
The answer is explicit and unequivocal: we do not, Mr. Ruecker! We do not need 
your assistance or your efforts in the preservation and protection of the 
Serbian cultural heritage if offered in such a way and under such 
circumstances. Kosovo and Metohija are an integral part of the Serbian State 
and the Serbian Church and they are capable of protecting and preserving their 
heritage from the aggression and vandalism of both the Albanian terrorists and 
those who are unlawfully trying to usurp and relinquish it from our hands. 
The model that you are trying to fashion will not be possible to implement, Mr. 
Ruecker, unless you intend to realize it forcibly, which only throws more 
violence into the shoreless ocean of hostility used against the Serbs in Kosovo 
and Metohija.
Yet, we should not lose sight of the fact that the end of your mandate will 
come soon, Mr. Ruecker, as it came to your predecessors. The end of UNMIK's 
mandate is also approaching and soon nobody will remember Mr. Ruecker and his 
activities in Kosovo and Metohija. Like dust will the memory of you and UNMIK 
fade and the trace left behind will be neither radiant nor agreeable.
But it is God's Church that will endure and survive in Kosovo and Metohija. She 
endured the myriads of conquerors and procurators from time immemorial and she 
will subsist today's tribulation. The mandate and existence of God's Church in 
Kosovo and Metohija is measured in centuries, and it will continue to be 
measured in centuries long into the future.
  
What was destroyed will be restored in the same manner as is already being done 
with the Manastir Banjska, George's Pillars, Sts Archangels - but without UNMIK 
and UNMIK's Contracts and Agreements
  
In the end, Mr. Ruecker, you should know that on the territory of the Serbian 
State, in Kosovo and Metohija, one cannot conduct work in that way, and cannot 
conclude similar Agreements without the consent of the Serbian Orthodox Church 
and the Serbian State.
Why are you trying here, on the territory of the Serbian State, to contest the 
right of the owner, creator, and guardian of its cultural heritage - the very 
right that is honoured in your own county?
   
  From which historical perspective should that be seen, Mr. Ruecker?
  
I cannot help but wonder about your true convictions regarding us, considering 
that you signed the Agreement which administers our property and our cultural 
heritage and yet never found it necessary to inform me. I found all this out 
only owing to the media coverage and during an informal meeting with you, after 
two and half months, when you also attempted to mislead me. 
  
My desire for the restoration of the destroyed and desecrated Serbian cultural 
heritage is resolute and unequivocal. I assure you that no one more than I, the 
Bishop of Ras and Prizren, has a stronger wish for a complete and swift 
restoration of the 150 destroyed churches and monasteries.
  
I am also endeavouring to improve our situation and I want to do everything 
that is within my power to commence the restoration as soon as possible. This 
has been demonstrated in what has so far been accomplished under the 
supervision and by the Diocese of Ras and Prizren in the restoration of several 
monasteries. The list includes several monasteries that were deserted (Banjska, 
Sts Archangels, George's Pillars, etc.).
  
I cannot emphasize enough how valuable and welcome any and every assistance 
would be in supporting our efforts in this task but it has to be accompanied by 
the respect of the rightful owner, creator, and guardian of the cultural 
heritage throughout the centuries of Serbian history. You are in all 
probability not accustomed to such a direct and open way of communication. But 
what can be done, such is the language of Truth.
  
I expect that you, Mr. Ruecker , shall soon deliver to us the integral text of 
the Agreement signed on January 29, 2007, as well the Memorandum signed on 
September 2006.
  
With respect,

        The Bishop of Ras-Prizren
and Kosovo-Metohija
+ARTEMIJE


    
---------------------------------
  
   
  The Orthodox Bishop
   of Ras-Prizren
 and Kosovo-Metohija
 No. _________
Date: May 31, 2007.
Prizren - Graèanica

Ms. Francoise Riviere
Assistant Director General for Culture
UNESCO
PARIS
 
Esteemed Madame Riviere: 
  
During our most recent meeting with Mr. Joachim Ryker, the Special Envoy of the 
Secretary General of the United Nations for Kosovo and Metohija and the Chief 
Administrator of the UNMIK Mission, we learned that the agreement for the first 
project of the rehabilitation and preservation of the cultural heritage of 
Kosovo and Metohija was signed on January 29, 2007, between UNESCO and UNMIK. 
We also learned that Mr. Ryker was the signatory on behalf of UNMIK and that 
his counterpart on behalf of UNESCO was in fact you. 
  
Owing to the Media coverage, we also discovered that the Memorandum of Mutual 
Understanding was concluded between UNESCO and UNMIK on September 2006. The 
purpose of the Memorandum is to identify the interventions required to proceed 
with the rehabilitation, protection, and preservation of Kosovo’s cultural 
heritage. 
  
Madame Riviere, I was quite astounded by these two distressing and inopportune 
actions undertaken by UNESCO.
  
These actions also served as a reminder of the positions outlined in the 
Reports prepared by the UNESCO missions after their 2003 and 2004 visits to 
Kosovo and Metohija, and whose recommendations were also published in those 
Reports. Many of those recommendations are unacceptable to: the Serbian people; 
the Serbian Church; and Serbian Institutions. This is nothing but rude 
interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state, a member of the UN 
and UNESCO, and is therefore a violation of the UNESCO Convention on the 
preservation of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. 
  
Because the purpose of this letter is not to scrutinize the Reports and revise 
all their deficiencies, I shall restrain my writing to drawing attention to a 
few unacceptable standpoints, conclusions, and recommendations made by the 
aforementioned missions.    

  After the known pogrom against Serbs and their holy sites that took place in 
Kosovo and Metohija on March 17, 2004, the UNESCO mission, in a Report titled 
"Cultural Heritage in South East Europe: Kosovo", made the following 
statements: 

1. "UNESCO can collaborate on a regular basis with UNMIK in devising a program 
for the protection of the cultural heritage"
  
2. "Furthermore the introduction of a system for annual monitoring of the 
cultural heritage in Kosovo through a permanent committee of UNESCO experts is 
recommended"
  
3. "The principal recommendation is that the international community in Kosovo 
should proceed without delay to develop a new strategy and early warning 
mechanisms for the protection of cultural heritage"
  
In the Report that followed the visit of the UNESCO mission in Kosovo and 
Metohija in 2003, the following Recommendations were listed:
  
1. "It is recommended to the political authorities that the PISG (Provisional 
Institutions of Self Government) - Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports open 
the doors for joint ventures with the donor countries and relevant 
international organizations in order to undertake:
  
-         a definition of priorities of the sites to be restored and protected
  
-         a reconstruction of destroyed monuments of exceptional historic value
  
-         the establishment of a specialized centre for the restoration of 
cultural heritage sites, which would also train artisans and workers 
specialized in traditional arts and crafts"
  
2. "UNMIK would have a central role to play in the implementation of the above 
recommendations".
  
3. It is also suggested that “UNMIK could take the initiative of signaling a 
new priority to cultural heritage protection.
  
The term "Kosovo heritage" is being used several times in both Reports.  In 
addition to this one, other terms are also being used - "cultural heritage in 
Southeastern Europe", "cultural heritage in Kosovo", "multiethnic heritage", 
and again "the monuments of Kosovo", the "unique history of Kosovo", "Byzantine 
civilization". 
  
But in referring to the heritage, whose creator and guardian has been the 
Serbian Church and Serbian people over the centuries, the terms "Serbian 
heritage" or "the heritage of the Serbian people" are not mentioned even once. 
In this way the Serbian cultural heritage in Kosovo and Metohija is being 
renamed, and the path is being laid for the institutions of the Serbian people 
to be excluded from guarding their heritage which, in effect, eliminates the 
prerogatives of the Serbian people to inhabit these territories.  
  
Without getting into a deeper analysis of the aforementioned and other 
deficiencies of the Report, I can refer you to Ms. Marie-Paule Roudil from 
Venice, with whom I carried on an extensive correspondence. 
  
Unfortunately, it is only owing to the media coverage that I learned that the 
signed Agreement stipulates the works on the churches of the Entrance of the 
Most Holy Theotokos in Lipljane, St. Sava in Kosovska Mitrovica, St. Archangel 
Michael in Stimlje and the Budisavci Monastery near Klina.
  
I wonder, to put it mildly, why UNESCO did not inform me - the official Prelate 
of Ras-Prizren and Kosovo-Metohija Diocese - about their intentions regarding 
the activities on Kosovo and Metohija, about the signing of the Agreement, and 
about the planned priorities? 
   
  When your colleague, Mr. Marie-Paule Roudil, intended to commence with 
certain activities on the restoration of the Church of the Holy Theotokos 
Ljeviska in Prizren in 2004, she was at least considerate enough to inform me 
of her intentions and to ask for my consent.    
  
I take this opportunity to advise you that I and my people cannot accept the 
imposed priority list of the objects selected for the reconstruction. The 
priority list, in case that cooperation and mutual dealings are required, has 
to be in an agreement with the Bishop in charge of the Diocese. 
  
It is also unacceptable that the international organizations take over the role 
of conceiving the programs for the protection of Serbian cultural heritage, of 
formulating the strategy, as defined in the UNESCO's Letter of Recommendations, 
as well as for UNMIK to assume the pivotal role in the implementation of the 
suggested Recommendations. 
  
Is not such a policy, as defined in the referred UNESCO Report and now applied 
by the signing of the Agreement by UNESCO and UNMIK on January 2007, and by the 
signing of the Memorandum on September 2006, in direct opposition to the 
Convention on the preservation of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 
adopted in Paris in 1972, which affirms that:
  
 "…it is incumbent on the international community as a whole to participate in 
the protection of the cultural and natural heritage of outstanding universal 
values, by the granting of collective assistance which, although not taking the 
place of action by the State concerned, will serve as an efficient complement 
thereto";
  
 "Whilst fully respecting the sovereignty of the States on whose territory the 
cultural and natural heritage is situated, and without prejudice to property 
rights provided by national legislation, the States. Parties to this Convention 
recognize that such heritage constitutes a world heritage for whose protection 
it is the duty of the international community as a whole to cooperate";
 "The States Parties undertake, in accordance with the provisions of this 
Convention, to give their help in the identification, protection, conservation, 
and presentation of the cultural and natural heritage, if the States on whose 
territory it is situated so request."
  
Can UNESCO and UNMIK plan any undertaking in the domain of cultural heritage in 
Kosovo and Metohija without the consent of the member state of the UN and 
UNESCO?  
  
Who has the right to relinquish the cultural heritage of one nation into the 
hands of international organizations, that is into the hands of the Albanian 
(Shqiptarian) community? 
   
  The state officials, be they ambassadors, whose mandates are limited and 
short, are certainly not entitled to such rights; especially if they are not 
members of the Church that has been the creator, guardian, and owner of the 
largest share of Serbian cultural heritage in Kosovo and Metohija for 
centuries.   
  
I assure you that no one more than me, the Bishop of Ras and Prizren, has a 
stronger wish for a complete and swift restoration of all churches and 
monasteries destroyed over the past several years under the rule of the 
international community that practically reigned over the part of the Serbian 
state in Kosovo and Metohija. 
   
  It is, therefore, my opinion that the most likely way for UNESCO to realize 
its wish to help restore Serbian cultural heritage in Kosovo and Metohija is by 
notifying me, in writing of your intentions, offering your resources and 
readiness to assist in the process of the reconstruction led by the Ras-Prizren 
Diocese.  
  
The manner in which you commenced your involvement with the reconstruction of 
destroyed Serbian heritage in Kosovo and Metohija is otherwise unacceptable, 
and could not actually be accomplished unless you intend to forcibly impose 
your decisions against the wishes of the rightful owner and heir of the 
heritage, thus damaging the credibility and reputation that UNESCO enjoys on 
these territories.    
  
A longing and a desire, a determination and an endeavor invested by me - the 
Bishop of Ras and Prizren - in the reconstruction of destroyed and devastated 
Serbian churches, has been demonstrated in what has so far been accomplished in 
Kosovo and Metohija. This mandate was granted to me by the Church that ordained 
me and is reinforced by the responsibility the Church handed over to me to 
protect and oversee the heritage that the Serbian people created over 
centuries. It is my duty to remain true to that mandate and hand over the 
heritage to the next generations to enable them to build their identity and a 
firm basis for their survival, as well as to allow them to remain on the world 
stage.   
With highest respect, 
   
  
        The Bishop of Ras-Prizren
and Kosovo-Metohija
+ARTEMIJE




Cc:Marie-Paule Roudil, Head of the Culture Section of UNESCO Office in Venice
 

       
---------------------------------
Make free worldwide PC-to-PC calls. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger with 
Voice

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Одговори путем е-поште