The Balkans got its due, but there are bigger issues

Deputy Assistant Secretary Gabriel Escobar, in charge of relations with the Western Balkans, testified this morning at the House Subcommittee on Europe, Energy, the Environment and Cyber. He toed the traditional US lines: EU accession within a foreseeable timeframe of all the Western Balkan states, maintenance of their sovereignty and territorial integrity, and countering the malign influence in the region of Russia and China. The specifics included

• a start to EU accession negotiations for Albania and Macedonia before the end of this year,
• support for the EU “normalization” dialogue between Pristina and Belgrade with the aim (ideally) of mutual recognition,
• insistence on sovereignty, inclusiveness, and democracy in Montenegro,
• hope for electoral, economic and rule of law reforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and
• sharp criticism of those who want Republika Srpska’s 49% to secede.

The House members were supportive but questioned Escobar on whether US the negotiator for electoral reforms was too close to the ethnic nationalists in Bosnia and Herzegovina, whether enough is being done to counter China and Russia, what more might be done on energy and trade, and how the Adminstration’s authority to impose corruption-related sanctions will be used. Escobar asserted that the US push for Bosnian electoral reforms will aim at ensuring all citizens are treated equally (as required by European court decisions), he emphasized the US lacks the autocratic tools that China uses to penetrate the region economically, he elaborated on energy issues (especially the prospects for liquified natural gas), and he pledged vigorous use of the new sanctions authority.

It was a fine performance, but I would fault it on a few details: even a lukewaram endorsement of the Open Balkans initiative that Serbia is pursuing should be conditioned on the requirement to treat all prospective members, including Kosovo, as equal partners. Failure to mention the EU’s long delay in granting Kosovo a visa waiver program is an important error of omission, as it has caused the most EU-positive country in the region to suffer increasing doubts about whether its government can deliver. I am also skeptical of the pursuit of electoral reforms within a flawed constitutional structure in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We’ll just have to wait and see whether that will work well or simply solidify the ethnic nationalist hold on power. Russian progress in penetrating and instrumentalizing its relationship with Serbia was not, I think, adequately appreciated, especially in the military sphere as Serbia massively re-arms to the consternation of its neighbors.

All that said, the big missing piece was how we get to the Administration’s goals–EU membership for all the countries of the Western Balkans–from where we are. The EU quite rightly has tightened requirements for membership, based on its not entirely happy experience with new members who slide backwards in their commitments to accountable and transparent government, individual rights, foreign policy alignment, and other important dimensions of joining the EU. The Western Balkan countries are complaining bitterly that enlargement lacks political support among many member states. The result has been a seemingly ever-more-distant horizon for accession, over which the US has precious little leverage.

One parting note: the House members may not be able to pronounce “Podgorica,” but their questioning was apt and even perspicacious. Two of the members have significant numbers of Bosnians resident in their districts, one has been involved with the region in various capacities for decades, and others just seemed well-staffed. But no one should be fooled: this hearing will get little or no ink in tomorrow’s papers, which are much more interested in the torturous trajectory of President Biden’s budget proposals. Today’s hearings on climate change will attract a lot more attention. The Western Balkans got its due, but there are a lot bigger issues out there.