29 Oct 2007
UNILATERAL ACTION ON KOSOVO STATUS WOULD AFFECT SERBIA’S EUROPEAN PATH,
BELGRADE OFFICIALS CLAIM AT NATO PA SEMINAR
A unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo would seriously
undermine Serbia’s fragile democracy, stall its march towards Euro-Atlantic
integration, and erode regional stability. This was the overarching message that
Serbian government officials and parliamentarians conveyed to NATO legislators
and representatives of international organizations gathered in Belgrade for the
NATO PA 67th Rose-Roth seminar, on 25-27 October.
The situation on the ground remains very uncertain. Participants in the
seminar heard many fears about the potential consequences in Serbia, as well
among Kosovo Serbs, of the unilateral independence of Kosovo. However, several
speakers emphasised that it was equally unclear what would happen in Kosovo if
the status quo were to be prolonged.
In view of this looming crisis, former UN envoy to Kosovo Kai Eide called
for moderation on all sides and urged the international community to “turn every
stone” to find a compromise solution acceptable to both sides before the 10
December deadline set by the UN Secretary General for the negotiations led by
the EU-US-Russia troika. He warned however that a continuation of the status quo
could have destabilising consequences for Pristina. Now more than ever,
there was a need for clarity and for closure. “You have to draw the line
somewhere”, he said.
In his keynote address, the Norwegian diplomat soundly criticised the
international community for neglecting, as part of the status process, to
provide “sufficient incentives” for Kosovo Albanians to implement the standards
that would make Kosovo politically and economically viable.
Arben Qirezi, advisor to Kosovo’s prime minister, disagreed with Eide’s
assessment on standards implementation, insisting that many provisions of the
Ahtisaari plan had already been adopted. He further accused Belgrade of
undermining this process by encouraging Kosovo Serbs to boycott elections and
the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government (PISG).
Other participants argued that further implementation of standards was not
possible under the current arrangement, and that the status quo in Kosovo was no
longer sustainable. Steven Schook, Deputy Special Representative of the UN
Secretary General in Kosovo, stated that true economic development was very
problematic without a status resolution, as foreign investments would not flow
in until there was institutional clarity. In addition, worrying signs of a loss
of trust in the PISG and the role of the international community presented a
serious risk for Kosovo’s security.
Jonas Jonsson, head of the EU Preparation Team in Kosovo, maintained that a
new arrangement along the lines of the Athisaari report, with the EU in the
lead, would be able to guarantee the major elements for Kosovo stability,
notably institutional and administrative decentralization, protection of
cultural heritage and full respect for the rights of all ethnic groups.
Most people in Kosovo were united by a desire to become EU citizens and this
helped EU efforts to develop civil society and promote economic growth.
“Kosovo is a European problem and needs a European perspective”, he
stated.
In contrast, Serbian Deputy Minister for Kosovo and Metohija, Ljubomir
Kljakic, maintained that the Ahtisaari report’s proposals were based on double
standards, and an independent Kosovo would represent little more than new
Western colonialism. “Kosovo, he insisted is “a blackhole”, and it is not
sustainable economically, unless within Serbia.
EU and NATO officials and analysts presented a mixed assessment of Serbia’s
progress towards Euro-Atlantic integration. Judy Batt of the EU Institute
for Security Studies, bluntly stated that “the European perspective for Serbia
is dying” and wondered: “who is killing it?” While praising the current Serbian
government for demonstrating more commitment to EU integration than the previous
executive, she regretted the “chronic weakness of the internal drivers for
reform”, noting that reform is only happening under external pressure. Ms
Batt argued that the Serbian leadership appears not to understand the rules of
the game, or rather, to be playing a different game, “using Kosovo as a new
ground of confrontation between East and West”. She insisted that resolution of
Kosovo’s status was not a condition for Serbia’s European integration, but
nonetheless represented “baggage hindering Serbia’s EU aspirations”.
Unfortunately, the attraction of EU membership in Serbia, long seen as the
magnet which would facilitate the acceptance of an unpopular decision on Kosovo,
is waning.
NATO officials delivered a similarly mixed picture of Serbia’s relationship
with the Alliance. Following the invitation to join Partnership for Peace (PfP)
in 2006, Belgrade had stepped up its efforts in the area of defence reform,
notably in setting up wide-ranging defence reform working groups, as described
by both Defence Minister Dragan Sutanovac and Army Chief of Staff, Lt Gen
Zdravko Ponos. NATO officials underlined however that much remained to be
done. Compared with other regional states, Serbia still appeared to lack a
clear political commitment to work with NATO. Basic steps - notably the
adoption of important legislation on defence and the armed forces - had still
not been taken due to resistance in certain circles and disagreements between
the two major parties in the government. Frank Boland, NATO’s Director of
Force Planning, supported the Minister’s “up-beat” assessment of the defence
reform process. He noted that the level of engagement by Serbia and NATO
was very high, and that Serbia had made great progress in the year since it
joined PfP. However, he stated that NATO was prepared to offer more –
including an Individual Partnership Action Plan - and he felt that Serbia was
“not yet fully taking advantage of what PfP has to offer”.
As NATO prepares for an important summit in Bucharest in April 2008,
Kai Eide expressed the hope that all countries of the region would be ready to
take one step further towards integration. He warned however that progress
by some countries should not be held hostage to the slower pace of others.
Jaroslaw Skonieczka, NATO’s Director for Euro-Atlantic Integration and
Partnership, widened the discussion of further integration by noting that “there
is a risk that Serbia will fall behind”. He warned that “the prospects of
different speed in the region is becoming real”.
The 67th Rose-Roth seminar gathered in Belgrade some 60 legislators
from NATO and partner countries, together with a significant number of academics
and experts, in the Serbian capital to discuss with government officials,
international officials and opinion leaders from the Balkans about the major
regional political and security issues.
End of mail