What can Grenell produce?
I’ve done three interviews in the last week on the Serbia/Kosovo talks to be held in Washington next weekend. Here they are:
Fitim Gashi (Koha Ditore)
Q: President Trump’s envoy for Kosovo-Serbia dialogue, Richard Grenell, has reignited the engines to bring the parties back to the negotiating table. He received confirmation from governments in Pristina and Belgrade that they will respond the invitation for a meeting in Washington on June 27. How do you comment on this?
A: It’s a bad idea whose time has come. No one should be negotiating anything important with an American Administration that could lose power in less than 5 months.
Q: The meeting in Washington, came at a time when EU Commissioner Miroslav Lajcak visited Pristina and Belgrade with the aim of setting future dates of the dialogue? Do you see EU-US conflict of competence in terms of dialogue?
A: Yes. The US is aiming to upstage the EU. This is juvenile, but so is President Trump.
Q: The lack of coordination EU-US, how much harms the process and the quality of potential agreement?
A: Lack of EU-US common purpose is bad: the US needs EU leverage to get good things done in the Balkans, and the EU needs US prestige with both Belgrade and Pristina. Together they can achieve something good. Separately they can do far less and may cause serious harm.
Q: Regarding EU-US division, how much has contributed developments within Kosovo, where we have President Thaci contesting the mediating role of Lajcak?
A: The President is siding with Grenell against Lajcak, who will have to try to deal with Prime Minister Hoti. Hoti has stated a clear and compelling position on negotiations with Belgrade, but his government is weak and President Thaci seems uninterested in what it says and wants.
Q: Do you see attempt to rush for an agreement between Kosovo and Serbia, before the US presidential election?
A: Yes. Grenell is trying to deliver a diplomatic show-piece for Trump before November 3.
Q: What is the risk of signing an agreement that does not contribute to long-term stability in the region? Significant: despite their denials, the Americans have opened the door Belgrade’s partition ideas, which would be bad not only for the region but also for many other places, especially Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova. Only Presidents Putin and Vucic could be happy with partition.
Q: What compromises should make both sides, and what must be done if there is an attempt to reach an agreement that implies border changes?
A: I can’t decide what compromises they should make, but there is lots to do in removing trade barriers, opening direct contacts between the two armies, encouraging people-to-people contacts, implementing the existing “technical” agreements, ensuring protection of property rights in both countries, and ensuring that Albanians in Serbia and Serbs in Kosovo have comparable rights and status.
Q: Will Kosovo be able to reject a bad agreement, if it is signed in Washington?
A: The government, parliament, and people of Kosovo have all made clear their opposition to partition. But if the two Presidents were to agree to it, people in both northern Kosovo and southern Serbia would start moving, creating facts on the ground that would be hard to reverse. The results will be disastrous for human rights and a triumph for ethnic nationalist ideology.
Q: Mr. Grenell on several occasions has mentioned the intention for Kosovo and Serbia to reach a peace agreement through useful economic measures. Can this be done?
A: Economic measures can help to pave the way. They are the most important thing to do now. But Grenell has talked he talk. He hasn’t walked the walk.
Q: Can all the open problems between Kosovo and Serbia be solved, which would lead to mutual recognition?
A: Yes, eventually, but I doubt it at present. President Vucic seems uninterested in that proposition, unless and until he gets territory.
Q: Do you expect Russia to be involved in the process?
A: The Russians don’t have to be involved in a partition process, because it will fulfill their dreams without any effort on their part. Eventually, they will need to be on board with Kosovo membership in the UN.
Q: What will happen to the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue if Russia is included, can this process it end up in Security Council of UN?
A: The Security Council will have to approve Kosovo membership in the UN, without a veto from Russia or China. Putin will demand a high price for that: likely US recognition of the “independence” of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as well as Russian annexation of Crimea. I doubt the Americans, even under Trump, will agree to even the first half of that, but Trump is unreliable and volatile. You never know, because he understands little and cares less.
Besnik Velija (Gazeta Express)
Q: In yesterday’s interview for our newspaper, Grenell said that the meeting in Washington will be only for economic issues. As he declared, the Phase II (political one) belong to Europe. What are your expectations for such a meeting in the White House and do you really believe that Kosovo and Serbia will travel to Washington to discuss economic issues?
A: I’ll be happy to see the Washington meeting focus on economic issues, including non-tariff trade barriers as well as unimplemented “technical” agreements between Belgrade and Pristina. You’ll have to ask the Presidents whether they are traveling for that purpose. Grenell says they are.
Q: Traveling to Washington, Serbia and Kosovo have been forced to give up pure political issues such are the derecognition campaign and seeking membership in international organizations. Why would this be necessary, if only economics will be discussed on the White House?
A: The suspension of the derecognition campaign and seeking membership in international organizations are confidence-building measures of little consequence, since they were initially announced to last only until the meeting. I am not convinced extending them would be a good idea. If Serbia wants to demonstrate that it is a friendly neighbor, it should be sponsoring Kosovo for membership in international organizations.
Added to this, Vucic one day before traveling to White House will meet Vladimir Putin in Moscow.
Q: Does this mosaic of previous meetings and events deny Grenell’s declarations for an “Economic Meeting” in the White House?
Q: You’ll have to ask President Vucic. He is certainly making it clear that he will not abandon his coziness with Putin in favor of a Western alignment. Playing Moscow against the West is classic non-aligned hedging behavior that will prevent Serbian membership in the EU.
Q: One last question about land-swap. Richard Grenell on his recent interview for FOX News declared that territorial details were policy of John Bolton, trying to create a gap between Trump and such an idea. Do you see this as a strategic election campaign move from the Trump side?
A: I do think Grenell may have realized that partition was a bad idea, which would be good if true. But truthfulness is not a value of this Administration. We’ll have to wait and see what the Washington meeting produces.
Veljko Nestorović (Dnevne novine):
Q: What do you expect to be the topic of conversation, economics as announced by Grenell or something else?
A: We’ll have to wait and see. I’ll be glad if they discuss economic issues like elimination of non-tariff trade barriers and implementation of the technical agreements already reached between Pristina and Belgrade.
Q: Richard Grenell said that the idea of correcting the border was John Bolton and not president Trump. Your comment?
A: If this is an effort to end the talk of border changes, my compliments to Mr. Grenell for recognizing partition as a bad idea. But this Administration is not known for its truthfulness. We’ll have to wait and see what happens.
Q: Can an agreement between Belgrade and Pristina follow by the end of this year?
A: Sure, you can have all sorts of agreements between Belgrade and Pristina before the US election, which is what Grenell wants. But there is unlikely to be an agreement on mutual recognition and entry into the UN, which are the big issues.
Q: What if Trump loses the election, does that change the US approach to the Kosovo problem?
A: Yes. Mr. Biden, whom I have testified in front of a number of times, will be a committed opponent of any border changes to accommodate ethnic differences in the Balkans and elsewhere. He will be a far stronger supporter of Kosovo sovereignty and territorial integrity than Mr. Trump has been, and he will vigorously support Serbia’s candidacy for EU accession as well as close US cooperation with the EU in the Balkans and elsewhere.
RSS - Posts
