Patriotism, not treason

I surprised a Kosovar visitor this morning with an idea I thought I had published long ago but now can’t find on peacefare:  Pristina should be represented in Belgrade.  So if I have already mentioned it, please excuse the repetition.

If not, here is my thinking.

I would never want to negotiate with a foreign state in whose capital I am not represented.  Why?  Because it is important to understand the political dynamics there.  Even if we are the direst of enemies, there will be a range of political views, with some leaning more in directions I might find useful than others. Having a representative there will help me to understand at least this much:  how not to strengthen my enemies.  I might even find some allies, especially if I couch my desires in the right terms.

Take Belgrade, for example.  Most of the Serbian political spectrum is rock solid in public in wanting sovereignty over Kosovo.  There are some who openly disavow that goal, but many more who realize it is not compatible with Serbia’s own ambitions to join the European Union.  It is in part a matter of priorities:  Serbia has limited resources (especially financial) and needs to limit its commitments.  That is why it concurred in Kosovo joining the IMF and World Bank, enabling Serbia to get out from under the obligation to pay some arrears.  There are today lots of people in Belgrade who would like more transparency and accountability for Serbia’s subsidies to Serbs in Kosovo.  Which is what Pristina should want too.  So screaming foul about the subsidies is likely not going to be as effective as calling for transparency and accountability, an objective at least some in Belgrade share.

But would Belgrade agree to Kosovo representation?  I don’t know.  But I do know that Serbia maintains state institutions inside Kosovo.  Reciprocity is the heart of state-to-state relations:  if Kosovo regards itself as sovereign and independent, it should ask for representation inside Serbia.

Of course Serbia may say “no,” since it does not regard Kosovo as sovereign and independent.  Pristina can’t evict the Serbian institutions, because they are located in the Belgrade-controlled north.  A better course would be to accept an unofficial office in Belgrade, one opened by a Kosovar nongovernmental organization.  The head would need to be an Albanian who speaks native Serbian and can appear publicly and informally as a spokesman and defender of the Kosovo institutions, just as the Serbian institutions in north Kosovo do for Belgrade.

Belgrade might want that non-office office to be located outside the capital.  That’s fine:  it should then be in the Albanian-majority Presevo valley.  Belgrade won’t like that, but if it refuses, it embarrasses itself.

The real problem with this idea is not Belgrade’s attitude–which we don’t know yet–but rather the Albanians.  I am reliably told that it would be hard to find someone to go to Belgrade, since that would be regarded as treasonous.  This is of course absurd:  representing your country in a hostile capital is patriotism, not treason.

 

Daniel Serwer

Share
Published by
Daniel Serwer
Tags: Balkans

Recent Posts

No free country without free women

Al Sharaa won't be able to decide, but his decisions will influence the outcome. Let's…

13 hours ago

Iran’s predicament incentivizes nukes

Transparently assembling all the material and technology needed for nuclear weapons might serve Iran well…

15 hours ago

Getting to Syria’s next regime

The fall of the Assad regime in Syria was swift. Now comes the hard part:…

4 days ago

Grenell’s special missions

Good luck and timing are important factors in diplomacy. It's possible Grenell will not fail…

1 week ago

What the US should do in Syria

There are big opportunities in Syria to make a better life for Syrians. Not to…

1 week ago

More remains to be done, but credit is due

HTS-led forces have done a remarkable job in a short time. The risks of fragmentation…

2 weeks ago