peacefare.net

My advice

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and EU High Representative Katherine Ashton will be in the Balkans together this week. Their common objective is to maintain peace and stability there and to hasten integration of the region into Euro-Atlantic institutions, especially the EU itself.  A visitor Friday suggested I tell them what to say.  Here is what I would advise, though I hasten to add that I have no reason to believe anyone is listening:

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Politics in Bosnia and Herzegovina are a mess.  The European Union is unhappy with Bosnia’s progress towards candidacy for membership.  The country’s proudest cultural institutions are closing shop due to lack of funding. Constitutional reform at the central government level is stalled.  The Americans have launched an apparently open-ended effort to change the Federation constitution, the 51% of Bosnia governed by a Croat/Bosniak entity.  The President of the other entity, Republika Srpska (RS), passes up no opportunity to declare the country is falling apart and is trying hard to make it happen.  The RS’s founder, Radovan Karadzic, is busily denying war crimes in The Hague.

The big threat to Bosnia is the EU itself, which ironically describes the peril this way:

Some political representatives are questioning Bosnia and Herzegovina’s capacity to function as a country and are calling for an Entity-level EU agenda separate from the Bosnia and Herzegovina state.

If Brussels gives into this temptation, Bosnia will break up, with the RS pressing for early entry into the EU as an independent state and the Federation thrust into a struggle that can only end in a breakup into Croat and Muslim mini-states.  There is no two-way partition of Bosnia.  The three-way partition risks leaving an Islamic state with uncertain borders somewhere in central Bosnia, a threat to both its Croat and Serb neighbors.  It is not difficult to picture the Bosniaks of Sandjak seeking to join this Islamic state, thus threatening the territorial integrity of Serbia and requiring Belgrade to act vigorously to protect itself from the threat of losing yet another province.

So the joint message from Clinton and Ashton should be this:  Bosnia and Herzegovina needs to put its own house in order and create a government in Sarajevo that can act authoritatively in implementing the Stabilization and Association Agreement already signed with the EU and in eventually negotiating EU membership. The EU has already said this in its typically opaque terms:

Establishing an effective coordination mechanism between various levels of government for the transposition, implementation and enforcement of EU laws so that the country can speak with one voice on EU matters, remains an issue to be addressed.

Clinton and Ashton should make it clear there will be no partition and no separate EU negotiations with the RS and Federation.  If the current mess continues, Bosnia will be left to stew in its own juices while the rest of the Balkans moves ahead.  Aid will be cut and diplomatic exchanges curtailed.  Those who are most responsible for the mess will find themselves barred from travel to the U.S. and EU and cold-shouldered in European and American visits to Bosnia.

Serbia

Belgrade has a new president and government whose help on Bosnia Ashton and Clinton should seek.  Serbia today understands the risks partition in Bosnia would cause for stability in Sandjak, its own territorial integrity and its own EU prospects.  President Nikolic and Prime Minister Dacic have no brief for RS President Dodik, who was a favorite of the previous administration in Serbia.  Before he manages to compromise the new president as he did former President Tadic, the Americans and Europeans should let it be known they will greatly appreciate Belgrade’s help in strengthening the central state in Bosnia and ending Dodik’s increasingly strident tirades against it.

Kosovo is the other big issue in Belgrade.  Clinton and Ashton need to tell everyone they meet that there will be no partition of Kosovo, something Dacic in particular has sought in the past.  Serbia, as the EU put it recently, has to accept the territorial integrity of Kosovo, whatever its status.  There is no basis in UNSC resolution 1244 or anywhere else for Serbia to hold on to the north, which it still occupies (even if it does not fully control the various enterprises there).  As Chancellor Merkel has made eminently clear, this means dismantling the parallel structures in the north and integrating it with the rest of Kosovo, in accordance with the wide-ranging self-governance provided for in the Ahtisaari plan.  The other issues Dacic has expressed an interest in can and should all be handled in the bilateral dialogue between Pristina and Belgrade.

There is more:  Kosovo will get an armed security force next year, in addition to its police.  The NATO-assisted design of that security force depends on the threats Kosovo faces.  If there continues to be a threat to Kosovo’s territorial integrity from Serbia, the Kosovo security forces will have to be armed and trained to meet that threat, in combination with guarantees and backup from NATO.  If, however, Belgrade establishes a more cooperative and business-like relationship with Pristina and unequivocally accepts Kosovo’s territorial integrity, the reduced threat will require less arming and training, and lower military expenditures in Serbia as well.

Kosovo

The Americans and Europeans have more reason to be satisfied with Pristina at the moment than with Sarajevo or Belgrade.  Despite political resistance inside Kosovo, Prime Minister Thaci met recently with Dacic, at Ashton’s behest and with U.S. encouragement.  The fulfillment of Kosovo’s obligations under the Athisaari peace plan and the consequent end of “supervised independence” in September was an important moment.

But Kosovo is far behind Serbia and other parts of the Balkans in preparing itself for EU membership.  Belgrade’s progress in this direction is likely to slow, at least for the next year or so.  Kosovo can do itself no greater favor than trying hard to catch up.  Clinton and Ashton should say this will require a stronger focus on implementing its mostly EU-compliant legislation and campaigning seriously against corruption and organized crime, as well as fixing its fraud-vulnerable electoral system.  It also requires avoiding all violence against Serbs or other minorities and showing the Kosovo state can maintain order when more nationalist Albanians take to the streets.

Bottom line:  The EU and U.S., when they act together in the Balkans, get what they want.  The trick is to make it clear that there is no daylight between them on the vital issues:  no partition in Bosnia or Kosovo and serious focus in all three capitals on preparing for EU membership, with all that implies in terms of strengthening the central state in Bosnia, Belgrade’s acceptance of Kosovo’s territorial integrity and reintegration of the north, and Kosovo’s effort to make its governance conform to European norms.