Tag: Balkans
Serbia’s musical chairs
Tomorrow peacefare will publish a piece on international implications of the Serbian elections. Today Milan Marinković writes from Niš:
Serbia elected a new president last weekend: Tomislav Nikolić, the leader of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS). Nikolić defeated incumbent Boris Tadić of the Democratic Party (DS) in the second-round runoff of the presidential race. This comes on top of a parliamentary election in which SNS won the largest number of seats. The time is coming to form a governing coalition with a majority of votes in parliament.
Nikolić’s victory strengthens Socialist Party leader Ivica Dačić as the kingmaker in postelection negotiations. He is the essential ingredient in either an SNS or a DS dominated coalition. In a statement following Nikolić’s election, Dačić said that his party’s pre-electoral agreement with DS basically remained in place, but the situation had now become more complex.
Dačić already proved to be an unreliable partner in 2008, when he was also the kingmaker following the parliamentary elections that year. Shortly after Daćić announced that his party had come to terms with the Serbian Radical Party (SRS) and Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS), he suddenly jumped ship, defecting to Tadić (DS).
In line with his proven pragmatism, Dačić is now keeping his options open. He knows that Nikolić as president is entitled to offer the mandate to the party of his own chosing. SNS will be Nikolić’s logical first choice not only because it is his party, but also because it won the largest single portion of the parliamentary seats.
Serbia’s constitution strictly limits the authority of president . His predecessor managed to hold a far greater share of power than the constitution allows due to the fact that his party was the core member of the ruling coalition. Incumbent prime minister Mirko Cvetković was just a figurehead. Tadić ran the government .
The only way for Nikolić to attain substantial power is to make his party a member of the next government. Otherwise, he will be as weak a president as Mr. Cvetković was a prime minister under Tadić. Nikolić therefore needs to give Dačić an exceptionally attractive offer to lure him away from the coalition with Tadić and DS. And Tadić – or whoever might replace him as the party’s next leader – will then have to offer even more to Dačić in order for DS to stay in power.
Only a grand coalition between Nikolić’s SNS and Tadić’s DS would leave Dačić out in the cold, but that’s a solution Nikolić presumably wants to avoid. Most of the people who voted for Nikolić did so out of their animosity to Tadić. If Nikolić were to ally with his fiercest rival, his voters would no doubt feel betrayed. After nearly a decade of unsuccessful attempts to defeat Tadić in one presidential race after another, Nikolić is unlikely to risk losing the popular support he has finally won in his fourth try, especially given the small margin of his victory.
A less irksome option for Nikolić would be the so-called “cohabitation” with a government in which his party does not participate – i.e. one that involves Tadić’s DS and Dačić’s (inescapable) SPS. That would help Nikolić portray himself as a responsible politician who puts the interest of his country before everything else – including his own and his party’s interests – serving as a “corrective factor” that supervises the government’s actions. Nikolić would thus be able to cooperate with a government that involves Tadić’s party, but without direct participation in an alliance with his main political opponent – something his voters probably could swallow.
If Nikolić wants to avoid cohabitation at all costs, his party and SPS will still need a third coalition partner. The Democratic party of Serbia (DSS), led by a former prime minister Vojislav Koštunica, seems most likely to join in. DSS publicly supported Nikolić prior to his runoff with Boris Tadić.
Such a government could put the European integration of Serbia at serious risk. DSS is irreconcilably anti-EU and openly pro-Russian. It is unclear what Nikolić could do to persuade Koštunica and his party to soften their stance against the EU. SNS itself maintains strong relations with Moscow, recently formalized in a cooperation agreement with Vladimir Putin’s United Russia. Some Serbian observers even suspect that SNS is a “Trojan horse” that has infiltrated Serbia’s pro-EU camp on behalf of the Kremlin.
According to opinion polls, Nikolić’s supporters oppose Serbia’s potential membership in the EU despite his official pro-EU position. Nikolić and Dačić share the dark nationalist past of 1990s and have adopted the European agenda only recently. They both have yet to prove their newfound commitment.
A “nationalist” government composed of SNS, SPS and DSS might most coherently reflect the election results. Most SPS voters also prefer Nikolić to Tadić, even though Dačić called on them to vote for the latter. But cohabitation, with DS leading the government but Nikolic in the presidency, would be preferable from a regional and international perspective, which sees risks in a return to a strongly nationalist Serbia.
An additional complication would occur if the SPS were unable to hold the allegiance of its other two electoral coalition members. That would greatly increase the number of arithmetic possibilities for achieving a parliamentary majority.
Dačić of late has begun to play down his ambition of becoming prime minister, which may suggest that he has realized it would be advisable to avoid the hot seat at a time when a number of unpopular steps will have to be taken and instead patiently wait for a next – more opportune – occasion.
Serbia’s game of musical chairs has begun. Who will be left out when the music stops?
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Hats off!
International institutions of all sorts come in for so much criticism in Washington these days I thought I would take a moment off from the usual bashing. Compliments are due to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), its head of mission in Kosovo Ambassador Werner Almhofer, and his deputy (my colleague and friend) Ed Joseph, for a small, serious and highly positive contribution to stability and peace in the Balkans.
The occasion was the recent presidential election in Serbia, which completed its second round yesterday (yes, I’ve got a piece drafted on its results, but my traveling co-author needs a chance to read it before we go to print). Serbs throughout Kosovo were entitled to vote, but it was not obvious how to enable them to do so. Pristina is none too happy these days with Belgrade’s monkeying around in north Kosovo, and Belgrade had to ensure that Serbs could vote throughout Kosovo in a way that did not put in doubt the results.
Enter a last-minute negotiated solution via the OSCE, the only viable alternative. In record time (I’m told 5 days!) it managed the electoral process in a way that seems to have satisfied both Pristina and Belgrade.
Anyone who wants to hear how this is done can attend Ed’s talk at the Center for Transatlantic Relations, his perch before going off to Pristina, Friday 10-11:30 in room 500 at 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW (BOB to the cognescenti). I won’t be there, as I’m headed Thursday for Istanbul, then Pristina next week. But Ed is a really good speaker and has a great tale to tell!
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Greece is defeating its own purposes
Nikos commented on my previous post urging Athens to export stability:
An article from 2.150 A.D.: “Northern Mexico wants to join NATO with the name Virginia. We must hear those peoples voice because they have the right for self-determination. Recognizing them by this name means also that every Virginian that lived there the last thousand years is only Virginian and they never have been Americans there. Including the eight Presidents that born there and any other historical figure that Americans demand as their own. Virginians are no Americans and the opposite. And ancient Virginians were no Americans also. The history of Virginia is the history of the Former Mexican Republic of Virginia. And some day Virginians (Mexicans) will have the historical right to take Virginia state into their territory because it is their right.”
This is a little example which can make Americans see the problem with the Greek view. I chose this example because this page is American. With the use of our imagination we can think other examples with other American states or other countries. But still it will be a minor example because Macedonia (Greek, Ancient) is many more for the Greeks of what is any American state for Americans. I’ve tried to be brief here. Dozens of books have been written which they cannot fit in a comment.
Let me assure you, Nikos, that your example rings hollow to American ears: we would take it more as a risible compliment than anything else. Only those terribly insecure in their own identity and uncertain of their capacity to defend their own territory would object. If this Virginia were ready to contribute seriously to NATO defense capabilities, it would be welcomed with open arms.
As for the supposed territorial ambitions of your neighbors, I’ve yet to find a FYROMer who thinks one inch of Greece will ever become part of their territory. There are surely more Mexicans who would like to recover parts of Texas, New Mexico and California than FYROMers who want a piece of Greece. Moreover, the best guarantee that it will never happen is of course NATO membership, which requires that all such problems be resolved.
Greece has nevertheless done what its political leadership thought best at the NATO Summit and blocked any consideration of The FYROM’s membership. This is not only a clear violation of the International Court of Justice decision but it also increases ethnic tension in Macedonia and puts at risk of partition Kosovo and Bosnia as well as Cyprus. Should I mention that everyone in the world except Greece calls the country whose capital is Skopje “Macedonia”? It’s a habit that neither its inhabitants nor the rest of the world will give up easily, especially if the practice continues for another decade or two.
Some day there will no doubt be a political leader in Greece who recognizes how counter-productive Athens’ resistance to The FYROM becoming a member of NATO is, but it is not clear that either Skopje or anyone else will see any reason to accommodate. The sooner Greece comes to recognize that it is defeating its own purposes, the less damaged those purposes will be.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Do the right thing
I wrote last October:
There has to be strict accountability for crimes against Serbs if Kosovo is to gain high ground in its international tug of war with Belgrade. The murders in recent weeks have to be made the object of serious investigations leading to arrests and prosecutions. And those who perpetrate these crimes, or who intimidate witnesses, should be viewed as what they are: enemies of a Kosovo state seeking to gain international recognition as a willing and capable defender of the rights of all its citizens.
I confess I do not know if there have been arrests and prosecutions for the murders I was referring to 7 months ago. I’ll be grateful if someone who knows leaves a comment on this post. But in any event what I wrote bears repeating, because it is happening again: threats against Serbs south of the Ibar and an attack on a police checkpoint in the majority Albanian portion of southern Serbia.
I don’t believe in collective guilt or punishment, but I do believe in collective responsibility. People who know better need to restrain the people who commit such crimes and speak out when the restraint fails. There is nothing that can hurt Kosovo’s campaign for international recognition and its effort to be accepted in international organizations more than crimes against Serbs. The perpetrators need to be discouraged, apprehended, tried and convicted. That is what the international community expects of a country that wants to be treated as independent and sovereign.
I met last week with Kosovo’s new crop of ambassadors going abroad. They are a well-educated, talented group, several of whom I’ve known for a long time. But the resources they command are minimal. Kosovo’s moral standing is vital to them. They cannot do their jobs if people in Kosovo are doing things that disgrace the homeland.
Ah, some will say, but you forget the crimes against Albanians! No, I don’t. I remember well hearing Nekibe Kelmendi talk about the murder of her husband and sons. How could anyone forget? And there are thousands of other cases, still unsolved, unprosecuted, unpunished. I don’t excuse Serbia’s failure to pursue these cases, but I have to admit that their failure to do so will have less impact, because Serbia is already a member of the United Nations. Kosovo isn’t.
That’s not fair. Life is not fair. You still have to try to do the right thing.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Block that kick!
A correspondent sent me this English translation of the transcript of Greek political leaders meeting on May 16, published on the Greek presidency website. Any corrections to the translation will of course be welcome:
Kamenos (Independent Greeks): Mr. President, we would like to have clear guidance from this Council of political leaders under your presidency on how to handle the issue that might arise with Skopje joining NATO at the Chicago Summit under the name “Macedonia”. I would like that we express our opinion that in this process we have even the option to veto the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to join NATO under the name “Macedonia”.
Kamenos: I would like to reopen the issue, whether there is a a possibility to give a direct order even for a veto to stop the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia from joining NATO under “Macedonia”. So far I don’t have an answer. I ask again mr. President.
Venizelos (PASOK): There will be, there will be.
Kamenos: All right then.
Venizelos: Regarding the important questions that were raised, as you know, the agenda of the NATO Summit does not include the question of admitting Skopje. So, there is no question of enlargement. And if there are any questions raised at the sidelines of the Summit, they will be dealt with according to our national strategy and the arguments that also include (our response to the) verdict of the International Court of Justice to the Hague. So, our arguments need to be more intelligent then the ones we gave in 2008 (Bucharest NATO Summit).
Samaras (New Democracy): Of course. We mustn’t back down from Bucharest.
Venizelos: Obviously. All we need to do is reinforce our arguments in a way that is, shall I say, more skillful and intelligent.
Kamenos: But is using the veto to last possible weapon? This is what I’m asking?
Venizelos: Yes, yes.
President Papoulias: I think that Kamenos speaks of the possibility that the Skopje issue is added to the Summit agenda…
Venizelos: Yes, all right.
Papoulias: …Because right now it is not.
Venizelos: On the other hand, the reaction after the Hague verdict was very friendly toward Greece and our positions. I say this because I dealt with the issue as defense and finance minister.
Tsipras (SYRIZA): Regarding NATO, if Ms. Papariga will let me speak so I don’t have to take the floor again, I would like to make the same point as Mr. Venizelos. To the best of my knowledge, the Summit Agenda is determined unanimously by the NATO members, and it doesn’t include the issue of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. So, unless there is some surprise, which is not common practice in such occasions, there is no serious problem. I believe that our position, that should be followed by the interim Government, is the position that we also held so far regarding this important issue, that we, as a country, want the name issue to be dealt with a mutually acceptable solution with a geographic qualifier. There is no need to go into this any longer. Regarding the NATO summit, I think we are covered by the fact that this issue is not on the agenda.
Papariga (Greek Communist Party): Because this issue is not on the agenda, there is no need for discussion. If it does suddenly appear on the agenda, the one who is going (to Chicago) will put a veto so it will not be discussed, because there is no official Greek Government. Our position is known, let’s not discuss it now, before the elections.
Kouvelis (Democratic Left): There is no need to open non-existing questions. It is not on the agenda. We have a specific strategy as a country. In any case it needs to be stopped. And it is possible to be stopped. We will be there to resist, if someone wants to put it on the agenda. But, today we have two facts: primarily, the national strategy and also the fact that the issue is not on the agenda.
Samaras: We are discussing this in case there is a surprise.
Kouvelis: That’s what I said.
Samaras: In case of a surprise there should definitely be a veto. We are not even discussing that.Venizelos: Agreed. These things are understood without saying.
Kouvelis: These things are understood Mr. Samaras.
It is rare that one gets a transcript of political leaders planning to violate a decision of the International Court of Justice. But it is also curious that they are discussing the admission of “Macedonia” to NATO. Everyone I’ve discussed the issue with, including those who call themselves “Macedonians,” agrees that Skopje can only enter NATO at this point as The FYROM, in accordance with the 1995 interim agreement.
At least Greece’s representatives in Chicago on Sunday and Monday will have something to do that the country’s political leadership, busily preparing for financial apocalypse, thinks worthwhile. Even though there is no ball in play, they are ready to block that kick!
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Never again?
Emir Suljagić, who survived the Srebrenica massacre at the age of 19, writes from Sarajevo:
Here is what’s happening in and around Srebrenica in broad strokes. As it happens, the trial of Ratko Mladic, who was in charge of the Republika Srpska (RS) troops there during the massacre 17 years ago, opens today in The Hague.
A political party actively campaigning on genocide denial looks as if it could win the mayoral race in Srebrenica later this year. This is unacceptable to those of us who survived the 1995 genocide there. It would give control over the Potocari Memorial, including my father’s grave and those of many other innocent victims, to people who deny the crimes that led to their deaths.
The Obama administration, including advisors such as Samantha Power and Susan Rice, appear to have taken US policy on Bosnia back to 1992, when Secretary of State James Baker said the United States had no dog in the fight. The American Ambassador to Bosnia, Patrick Moon, is not objecting to RS President Milorad Dodik’s demand to hold the election under the BiH Election Law, putting an end to the “Srebrenica exception.” It allowed all 1991 residents of Srebrenica to cast a vote in the elections regardless where they are at present. There are already around three thousand Serb voters from Serbia currently registered to vote in Srebrenica.
The political parties who do not deny that a genocide happened in 1995 could in theory stop this from happening by blocking the adoption of the Bosnian state budget, which Dodik needs because RS is in financial difficulty. But they have failed to do this, as they are more afraid of Dodik, the US government, and the Europeans than they are of the Srbrenica massacre survivors.
To counter this betrayal, the survivor groups have organized a coalition that will work to register citizens of Bosnia from all over the country to vote in Srebrenica in the upcoming election. This is permitted under Bosnian law. We have about 90 days before the voter lists are completed. I am convinced that we can register around three thousand people to help us stop the graves in Potocari from falling into the hands of those who deny killing those buried in them. No doubt some in the international community will try to stall this process. The survivors will make such attempts public, including to the international media.
The survivors’ associations have misgivings about the presence of international representatives in Potocari on July 11 this year, when the massacre is commemorated annually. It seems better to mark the occasion this year without those who were also absent 17 years ago and have now forgotten the suffering of the victims.
I read in Samantha Power’s America and The Age of Genocide: A Problem from Hell about Rafael Lemkin’s lobbying efforts with the Allies at Nuremberg to include genocide in the charges against Nazi leadership. He failed. My friends and I will go all the way in registration process. Because we know, like Dervis Susic, that “what we do for our country will be built into what is bound to happen one day.”
It is sobering to realize how little has changed. July 1995, when more than 8000 people were murdered at Srebrenica, could happen in today’s world as well. Perhaps it already is happening in Syria.
RSS - Posts
