Tough enough

While I confess to being thoroughly preoccupied with the Libyan revolution, I have tried also to keep an eye on German Chancellor Merkel’s visit to Belgrade.  This is important because it is an opportunity to make clear to Serbia what it will need to do in order to gain EU candidacy status, which it hopes will be granted late this year or early next. Any ambiguity will be seen in Belgrade as opening up room for partition in Kosovo, an ambition that Serbia has not yet abandoned.

Merkel appears to have been tough enough:  she reportedly asked Belgrade to renew the dialogue with Pristina (that’s easy!), allow the EU rule of law mission (EULEX) to establish its authority on the whole territory of Kosovo (hard for me to understand how that would be difficult for Belgrade, since EULEX regards itself as operating under UNSC resolution 1244) and abolish Serbian “parallel” institutions in north Kosovo, where they essentially govern the majority-Serb population without reference to Pristina (in clear violation of 1244).

It’s this last item that seems to have given Belgrade heartburn.  The German ambassador to Berlin is quoted on B92:

Belgrade is not surprised by the German chancellor’s requests. This could be anticipated from the previous messages we were getting, maybe just the sharpness of the request to abolish the institutions in northern Kosovo is something that was not expected….The request is something that Serbian authorities absolutely cannot accept at the moment. They have some calculations and I am afraid that one of them that we are giving in to everything because of the candidacy and our wish to join the Union. We have warned them, but unfortunately the German side’s firm positions remain.

Note that “we have warned them,” as if Serbia is in a position to dictate to Germany what it should say and what not. But note also the “at the moment.” There could be a big opening in those three little words.

I suppose in a back-handed sort of way, Belgrade’s insisting that its institutions have to remain in north Kosovo is an implicit acknowledgement that the rest of Kosovo is lost, but that is little comfort to those who worry that partition of Kosovo could lead to instability in other parts of the Balkans, as different ethnic groups seek to adjust borders to suit their preferences. This is a first-order European and American concern that Belgrade fails to take into account, even though it could well affect southern Serbia and Sandjak.

Kosovo in resolution 1244 is a single entity. Belgrade’s lawyers would do well to note that, and recall all their own pronouncements about how Kosovo cannot be divided. The Church is also adamant against partition, fearing rightly that the enclaves south of the Ibar might also be lost if Kosovo is divided.

That said, there is room for compromise, just not on the issue of sovereignty and territorial integrity. Pristina may want some of the Serbian institutions to stay in north Kosovo in one form or another, to assist with maintaining Serb education and culture and even to encourage Serbs to remain there, as they have done in the enclaves south of the Ibar, consistent with the Ahtisaari plan. That kind of compromise is something Belgrade will have to discuss with Pristina, not assert as a unilateral fiat.