Last month, national security adviser John Bolton said the United States “would not stand in the way” of a land swap deal between Serbia and Kosovo. Recent reports suggest the two countries are close to an agreement that would resolve one of Europe’s most challenging political standoffs since the end of the Cold War.
Hashim Thaçi, the President of Kosovo, is due to meet with his Serbian counterpart Aleksandar Vučić on 7 September. Bekim Çollaku, Chief of Staff to the President of the Republic of Kosovo, writes that the current limbo over Kosovo’s status serves no one’s interests, and that while a deal between Serbia and Kosovo might be opposed by some actors, there is nothing to fear from an agreed solution.
The current format of negotiations on the normalisation of relations between Serbia and Kosovo under the auspices of the EU has come to a complete standstill. Additionally, Kosovo’s internal affairs are becoming increasingly complicated. This impasse is creating a series of political, security and political threats for Serbia, Kosovo and the Western Balkans, but also the EU and NATO and their member states. Five and a half years after the adoption of the Brussels Agreement on the principles governing the normalisation of relations between Serbia and Kosovo, five EU countries, of which are four are NATO members, still do not recognise Kosovo’s independence. This stalemate impedes EU polices towards the region, which was painfully obvious during EU-Western Balkans summit in Sofia earlier this year.
BEOGRAD – Direktorka Centra za evroatlanske studije Jelena Milić ocenila je danas da je jako dobro što američki senator Ron Džonson dolazi u Beograd sada kada smo, kaže, imali dobru seriju popravljanja srpsko-američkih odnosa.
Direktorka Centra za evroatlanske studije Jelena Milić ocenila je danas da je jako dobro što američki senator Ron Džonson dolazi u Beograd sada kada smo, kaže, imali dobru seriju popravljanja srpsko-američkih odnosa.
Kada se povodom pregovora govori o razmjeni teritorija, time se lukavo kamuflira suština radi se prvenstveno o razmjeni stanovništva, a razmjena stanovništva i svi užasi koje takvi zločini kroz istoriju sobom nose, ne samo na Balkanu, ukazuju na potpuni trijumf kratkovide političke pragmatičnosti nad temeljnim civilizacijskim vrijednostima.
This must sound as a non-starter. More than a decade ago, Serbia proclaimed itself military neutral, first in order to appease the more nationalist, Eurosceptic parties in the government. It has followed the course ever since, both as an aspect and asset of its policy to counter and contest Kosovo’s bid for statehood. Bosnia and Herzegovina lost eight years following its Presidency’s request to activate the Membership Action Plan (MAP). And even if it was reasonable and in line with NATO practice back then, the condition to have all military facilities owned by the state and not by its entities has effectively given Banja Luka an excuse to stall on the issue of membership. Finally in December last year, National Assembly of Republika Srpska (RS) adopted its own Resolution on (protection of constitutional order and) military neutrality. In art. 5 it is explicitly stated that “RS (…) will coordinate any future status with Republic of Serbia as signatory of Dayton Peace Agreement”.
Da li je razgraničenje Srbije i Kosova zaista avet koja može da zapali balkansko bure baruta, kako tvrde pojedini analitičari? Postoji li način da se Beograd i Priština samostalno dogovore i sprovedu miroljubivo rešenje, a da to ne izazove haos u BiH ili Makedoniji?