Category: Uncategorized
Serbia should defeat Vucic, not Kosovo
Jakub is correct. American acceptance without substantial protest of the terrorist act attempted on September 24 in northern Kosovo is incompatible with any serious shift in US policy in the Balkans. Appeasement knows few limits. The Belgrade-sponored and -trained insurrectionists were not freedom fighters. They were proxies doing the Serbian state’s will against the Kosovo state, which the US recognizes and supposedly prizes as a partner.
This is nuts
Six weeks have passed without any apparent US or EU reaction, beyond mild scolding. In the meanwhile Serbian President Vucic has snubbed the EU in favor of attending a Beijing-hosted Belt and Road Summit.
Not surprisingly, the latest EU-sponsored meeting between Vucic and Kosovo Prime Minister Kurti failed to make progress. The EU and US want Kurti to institute an Association of Serb-majority Municipalities (ASMM) without any serious quid pro quo from Vucic. He is unwilling even to see Kosovo join the UN despite a supposedly “legally binding” February agreement not to block it from international organizations. I quote from Article 4: “Serbia will not object to Kosovo’s membership in any international organisation.” Bilateral recognition, Vucic persistently says, is out of the question.
The fault lies mainly in Belgrade
Serbia is mainly at fault for the present stalemate. It has refused to abide by agreements the EU and US claim are legally binding. The backstory includes Belgrade urging Serbs not to use Kosovo license plates, to boycott Kosovo elections, and to attack Kosovo police and international peacekeepers. Belgrade does not abide even by the 2013 agreement that launched the idea of the ASMM, which provides for the Kosovo constitution to be applied in the north, with ample provisions for Serb participation.
Nevertheless the EU is sustaining its “consequences” on Kosovo. They were levied to get duly-elected but non-Serb mayors from using their offices in northern Kosovo municipal buildings and to force Kosovo to reduce its police presence there. Only one of the four mayors I am told is going to his municipal building. The Kosovo police presence has been reduced due to improved security conditions. But there is no sign of easing on the EU’s part.
The Association
The nub of the issue is the Association. The EU gave Vucic and Kurti drafts of its statutes at their last meeting. I hoped it would have leaked by now, but apparently it hasn’t. The key question is whether the proposal guarantees that the Association will operate in accordance with the Kosovo constitution and not constitute a new layer of governance like Republika Srpska in Bosnia. That has rendered Bosnia dysfunctional. Republika Srpska originated in six Serb Autonomous Regions, which united to form the larger entity. That is a precedent the US and EU should not allow.
I’ve seen no guarantee they won’t. The Americans have published an op/ed that says it won’t happen. But they aren’t willing to sign on the dotted line to prevent it. Nor are the Europeans prepared to commit. Without such a guarantee, an elaborate proposal like the one from the European Institute of Peace and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung runs the risk of laying the groundwork for partition of Kosovo and secession.
The right way forward
The Americans succeeded last week in forcing the resignation of Serbian Security Information Agency chief Aleksandar Vulin. He is a diehard advocate of the “Serbian world,” which is code for Greater Serbia and entails Kosovo partition. It would be hard to doubt that he backed the September 24 plot, providing material as well as political support. But his resignation is no substitute for a major shift in Belgrade policy, which can only come from from the mouth of President Vucic. He needs to acknowledge responsibility for the September 24 plot, apologize, and pledge nothing like it will happen again.
The odds of that are nil to zero. Vucic has called parliamentary and local elections for December 17, hoping they will shore up his flaging support. Or at least give him a renewed mandate. He won’t be apologizing to Kosovo for anything in the middle of an election campaign. Nor thereafter.
The best that can happen now is defeat of the present governing coalition. The opposition claims it has united as “Serbia Against Violence.” That is good news. Now they need to focus on getting their often young, left/liberal, environmentalist, and anti-violence voters to the polls. Serbia should defeat Vucic. Not Kosovo.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The dialogue is dead, so what’s next?
Since before 2013 the US and EU have sponsored a “political” dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia intended to “normalize” their relations. This effort recently has been based on a German-French initiative aimed at a “two Germanies”-type agreement. East and West Germany in 1972 agreed to “…develop normal good neighbourly relations with each other on the basis of equal rights.” The result for the Balkans was a Brussels agreement promulgated in February and an Ohrid implementation plan promulgated in March. Kosovo has accepted both and offered to sign on the dotted line. Serbia has rejected both and refused to sign.
Belgrade also sponsored an attempted insurrection in northern Kosovo on September 24. It was intended to precipitate a Kosovo police reaction that would justify a Serbian military intervention. Serbia has celebrated the insurrectionists, whom it armed and trained. Belgrade has not taken responsibility or apologized for the terrorist acts its agents perpetrated.
This brings to an end any serious prospect for progress in the dialogue as presently constituted. So what is next? First, a careful look at what went wrong is in order.
Misjudgments
The European and American diplomats misjudged Belgrade, which has always insisted it would not recognize Kosovo. This explicitly includes any “back door” recognition, which is what the recent “normalization” non-agreements intended. Serbia has continued instead to look for, or create, opportunities to control the four northern Kosovo municipalities with Serbian majorities. President Vucic attempted to negotiate their annexation to Serbia with former Kosovo President Thaci. He has now tried to create a pretext for annexing them by military force.
The Americans and Europeans also misjudged Pristina. They attempted to force Prime Minister Kurti to create an Association of Serb Majority Municipalities. That would provide Vucic with the control over northern Kosovo he has sought. While the Americans promised not to allow the Association to become a governing entity, they have not been willing to show how they would prevent that from happening or to guarantee it in a formal governmental agreement.
Mistaken realignment towards Serbia
The Europeans have also failed to put their own house in order. Five European Union member states do not recognize Kosovo. This split in the EU has weakened its mediator, Miroslav Lajcak. In addition, Hungary, though a recognizer, has aligned itself with Russia and Serbia against Kosovo. The result is a lowest common denominator EU policy that is more respectful of Belgrade’s interests than Pristina’s.
The Americans have also aligned themselves more with Belgrade than Pristina in recent years. This appeasement was intended to move Serbia closer to the West and away from Russia and China. That effort has blatantly failed. Serbia has repeatedly preferred its military relations with Russia and its commercial relations with China over strengthened relations with the United States or Europe.
What would work better
First the Europeans and Americans need to correct their errors. This would mean rebalancing policy towards Pristina and away from Belgrade. It also means dropping overly ambitious goals. The Association and even backdoor recognition are not feasible, the former because of concerns in Pristina and the latter because of concerns in Belgrade.
The so-called “technical” dialogue that Belgrade and Pristina pursued prior to 2013 was far more successful than the “political” dialogue that came thereafter. It produced numerous agreements intended to improve life in both Kosovo and Serbia. Some have not been fully implemented. It is high time to return to those. Some may need revision.
To ensure implementation, the Americans and Europeans could form a monitoring group like the International Civilian Office that ensured implementation of the pledges Kosovo made at the time of independence. Such a group should include, in addition to prominent European and American leaders, Kosovo and Serbian government representatives as well as nongovernmental organizations. The aim should be 100 per cent implementation of the existing technical agreements and any additional ones reached.
One of the most important missing ingredients in relations between Serbia and Kosovo is personal contact. While at the leadership level they know each other well, the societies do not. The Europeans would do well to sponsor a major citizen-to-citizen effort, like the one that improved relations between France and Germany after World War II.
Postpone the politics
Some will be concerned that postponing the “final comprehensive agreement” would be a mistake. Certainly Kosovo needs recognition and United Nations membership as soon as possible. But it is not possible with the current political leadership in Belgrade and its alignment with Moscow and Beijing. Nor is the Association of Serb Majority Municipalities possible for the current political leadership in Pristina, especially in the wake of the September 24 terrorist attack. Both these agenda items should be postponed to the end of the normalization process.
The political situation is not “ripe.” There is no “mutually enticing way out.” Nor is there European and American will to ripen the conflict or create a mutually enticing way out. Conflict management types will recognize these as the necessary conditions for a successful negotiation. But there are lots of things to do other than final status. Without political will, the technical dialogue should be prioritized.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Future trouble is Gaza’s fate
The Israelis continue to pound Gaza, two weeks after the heinous terrorist attack Hamas mounted against Israel. We don’t know how much the bombardment has hurt Hamas. Its militants presumably hide underground and among the civilian population. But it has certainly harmed ordinary Palestinians. They are suffering horribly as well from the embargo on food, water, and fuel going into Gaza.
The better option right now
Well-meaning people are calling for a ceasefire. But Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) would use a ceasefire to re-organize and re-arm. That would lengthen the conflict and prolong the agony of Gazan civilians. A ceasefire would also require international monitors. It is hard to imagine where those would come from.
A bombing pause would be a better option right now. The bombing hinders all aspects of civilian life in Gaza and will block delivery of humanitarian aid. It started to flow through the Rafah Crossing from Egypt this morning. Observers aren’t needed to monitor a bombing pause, which should apply to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as well as Israel. Remote observation would suffice. Hamas and PIJ could try to use a bombing pause to re-arm, but Israel would be able to conduct raids to prevent that from happening.
The question of war aims
The Defense Minister told a Knesset committee yesterday that Israel’s war aims are
- destruction of Hamas’ military infrastructure;
- destruction of pockets of resistance;
- removal of Israel’s responsibility for life in Gaza and establishment of a new security reality for Israelis.
These are far more reasonable aims than I’ve seen quoted elsewhere. It makes no sense to destroy Hamas’ civilian governing infrastructure. That will be needed even during, and also after, the war to distribute humanitarian aid and health services as well as re-start education and other social services.
The ground invasion makes no sense
But the minister also appeared to promise a ground invasion: “Whoever sees Gaza from afar now, will see it from the inside.”
This makes no sense. Re-occupation of Gaza would be “fiendishly difficult,” to quote David Petraeus. The Israeli army knows that well. It has done it before. Now would be far more difficult, as Hamas is a formidable foe and well-entrenched. Israel’s cadres are largely reservists, not the professional special operations guys needed to ferret out Hamas. They will suffer many fewer casualties supporting the professionals from just outside Gaza rather than inside.
The new security reality
It is unclear what the minister meant by a new security reality. If it means higher walls and a tighter embargo, that is a formula for further radicalization in Gaza. Iran would no doubt like that and re-arm the radicals as best it could.
Israel will be tempted to try to re-implant the Palestinian Authority security forces in Gaza. But the PA has lost a lot of credibility with Palestinians. Its performance in the West Bank does not bode well. Hamas remnants would of course conduct guerilla operations against any PA presence.
I can imagine a multinational peacekeeping force in Gaza. But which countries would be prepared to lend it personnel? It would require tens of thousands of Arabic speakers. Egypt would decline, as it doesn’t take on more responsibility for Gaza. The Gulf would be uninterested. The North Africans likewise. Conditions at home would prevent Sudan, Yemen, Syria, or Iraq from lending a hand. Jordan would be skittish.
A wicked problem
Gaza poses wicked problems for which we don’t appear to have answers. Any attempt to solve one creates many others. Israelis are understandably less inclined to compromise than before the October 7 Hamas attack, even as Arabs understandably move towards more sympathy with Palestinians. That could mean trouble for a long time into the future.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Imbalance is not good for negotiations
Naile Ejupe of Pristina daily Bota sot asked questions last Saturday. I answered:
Bota sot: On Thursday, the meeting between the prime minister of Kosovo, Albin Kurti, and the Serbian president, Aleksandër Vucic, was held, the meeting had no result and there is disagreement between what kind of internationals and what Kosovo accepts, what is your comment about the meeting?
A: The internationals are insisting on a single priority: the Association of Serb Majority Municipalities. That offers nothing to Pristina. It is not surprising that this dialogue is not going anywhere.
The Association has become an absolute priority for Brussels, Washington, and Belgrade
Bota sot: Is Serbia conditioning the dialogue through the association and why is such a thing allowed
A: I’m not sure it is only Serbia making the Association an absolute condition. Washington and Brussels seem to be doing it as well.
Bota sot: How should Kosovo act when the pressures for the establishment of the Association have already started to increase?
A: I’ll leave up to Kosovo’s authorities how they want to react. But I hope they do so in a way that seeks to improve relations with Washington and Brussels. Kosovo needs its friends.
The US and EU need to guarantee
Bota sot: We are witnesses that Serbia has not respected the agreements with Kosovo, who should guarantee that Serbia takes any steps after Kosovo accepts the association?
A: The EU and US need to be the guarantors. I see no sign they are serious about taking on that responsibility. That is part of the problem.
Bota sot: The president of Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić, says that if he had said what Kurti declared “he would have been hanged in Berlin.” Here he refers to Prime Minister Kurti’s statement after the September 14 meeting, what Vučić is trying to do and how long will it continue to be tolerated?
A: You’ll have to ask the European and American diplomats how long they will tolerate it. I don’t see anything wrong with the refusal to accept the Association as a precondition, without any quid pro quo. Clearly the Association presents a threat to Kosovo’s sovereignty and territorial integrity so long as Serbia has not recognized Kosovo. I advised Lajcak years ago that if the Association is necessary it can only come at the end of the process, along with recognition, not at the beginning.
Kosovo was better prepared than Serbia
Bota sot: Let’s stick to Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić and his statement after the September 14 meeting, which he described as a difficult meeting, while the American ambassador to Serbia, Christopher Hill, then added that Serbia had “done its homework” and that “it was well prepared,” what difficulties can Vučić be talking about and what tasks has Serbia performed?
A: I saw no Serbian preparation for any serious concession to Kosovo. Belgrade’s preparation did however guarantee support for its perspective on the Association by Brussels and Washington. I am not a cheerleader for that accomplishment. That is what Pristina has to counter. I thought the Kosovo schedule for the talks a serious step in the right direction. I do not understand why it was not regarded as such.
Bota sot: Serbia is not stopping the inciting and threatening statements, a month ago the Serbian Minister of Defense said that Montenegro and North Macedonia offended Serbia by recognizing Kosovo’s independence, while Vučić on Friday (September 15) asked the Serbs of Montenegro demand the same rights as the Albanians in North Macedonia, is Serbia trying to interfere in the internal affairs of the countries of the region and thus destabilize the Balkans?
Serbia’s aim
A: Yes. Serbia’s aim is the Serbian world, which means at least de facto Belgrade control over the Serbs who live in neighboring countries. Serbia should not be asking for anything from its neighbors that it is not ready to offer to its neighbors.
Bota sot: While Serbia makes threatening statements, Kosovo is already under the punitive measures of the European Union due to the tense situation created in the north of the country after the elections and the placement of Albanian mayors in the municipalities, these measures are called unfair by Kosovo, while after the meeting on September 14 , the EU does not exclude other punitive measures, what is your comment about this?
A: Clearly Pristina needs to improved its relations with Brussels and Washington.
What endangers Kosovo
Bota sot: The representative of the EU for dialogue, Miroslav Lajçak, has given an ultimatum that the Kosovo-Serbia agreement be implemented by the end of the year, or there may be conflicts, how endangered is Kosovo and what conflicts could he be talking about?
A: You need to ask Miroslav what he is talking about. For me, the risk arises from any action, including a “false flag,” against Serbs in Kosovo that gives Belgrade an opportunity to claim it needs to move its army to the Ibar to protect Serbs. Protection of Serbs and other minorities is vital to Kosovo’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
There is of course also a risk of rioting by Serbs in the north against the non-Serb mayors or whatever police presence remains. But that went entirely unpunished last time it happened. I have no reason to believe it would be punished if it happened again. Washington’s tolerance for Serbian malfeasance appears unlimited.
Bota sot: Can visas for Kosovo citizens be suspended if the agreement is not implemented and if the association is not formed and how fair is this?
A: It would be completely unfair to suspend visas for Kosovo citizens. But that doesn’t mean it won’t happen.
Better balance is needed
Bota sot: Finally, what after the fruitless talks in Brussels?
I don’t know. But if I were one of the mediators I would be looking for a balanced package at every step, not one that requires one side to move while the other does nothing.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 11
– Intercept says Africom leader misled Congress.
– In FP, Cato analysts say Colombia is not proof US military can stop drug cartels.
– NYT says some Members oppose Ukraine aid despite benefits to their districts.
– Lawfare draws security assistance lessons from Ukraine.
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Stevenson’s army, September 8
-WaPo draws from new biography that Musk cut satellites to hinder Ukraine attack on Crimea.
– WaPo also has excerpt from the biography.
– Dan Drezner says Musk needs some foreign policy advisers.
– NYT warns pro-Russians lead in pending Slovakia elections
– Pro Publica criticizes the Littoral Combat Ship program
– NYT describes the upgraded Situation Room
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
RSS - Posts
