Montenegro needs to right itself, now
Miodrag Vlahović, former Foreign Minister of Montenegro, writes:
Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić should be gratified. Politicians close to him have finally become part of the 44th Government of Montenegro, Serbia’s neighbor to the southwest.
Others are not so pleased. The US Embassy in Montenegro has expressed concern that there are pro-Russian parties in the government. The EU Mission warns of hindrance to the European agenda. The new government uses European and NATO rhetoric, but their political practice and decisions follow the Belgrade-Moscow lead.
What happened
A Bosniak party enabled this governing coalition. It holds six ministerial mandates in the farcically cumbersome cabinet of Prime Minister Milojko Spajić. That is what it got to compensate for joining with parties that deny the Srebrenica genocide and treat war criminals Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladić as heros.
The new government has the two-thirds majority (54 out of 81 deputies) needed to enact significant legal and constitutional changes. They will want to enable dual citizenship and enact changes that would eliminate the civic concept of Montenegrin society. Already political leaders are presenting themselves as “the only authentic representatives” of their ethnic group. The dysfunctional Bosnian model of governance, based on ethnic group rights, is the daydream of ethnic nationalists in Montenegro.
But that is only one dimension of the new political constellation. The government includes no one who identifies as Montenegrin. The shrunken opposition includes parties of a civic, European and democratic orientation, but American and European diplomats have deemed them not “reformed enough.”
What it means
Spajić will allegedly try to implement the official European agenda and Euro-Atlantic policy. He will be doing this in cooperation with declared opponents of NATO, advocates of lifting EU-required sanctions against Russia, and parties that want to realize Greater Serbia. Mission impossible, but therefore desirable from the commanding heights of Belgrade and Moscow.
These same parties of the governing coalition, including Prime Minister Spajić himself, naturally look with enthusiasm at the possibility of Donald Trump returning to the White House. That shows precisely how little they are really oriented towards Europe, which Trump despises.
The Western policy of appeasement towards Serbia has now handed Montenegro to Moscow. The Biden Administration wasted four years pushing the anti-European project known as “Open Balkans.” That has enabled Vučić to meddle not only in Montenegro but also in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo, with inevitable negative implications for North Macedonia as well.
Deliveries of Serbian arms and ammunition to Ukraine and mammoth contracts for lithium exploitation in Serbia have made this possible. They are both an explanation and a verdict. The EU’s continuing financial support for Serbia, regardless of Belgrade’s other behavior, reveals its true intentions, which condemn the rest of the Balkans to instability.
What needs to be done
Montenegro is on the brink. The Bosniak party is in power with nationalist populists and chauvinists from the Serbian-Russian milieu. A coalition of three nationalist parties presided over the beginning of the 1992 war in Bosnia. The Bosniak leaders who join this coalition will enable threats to Montenegrin sovereignty and independence.
The opposition parties need to answer the question whether this is a “point of no return” for Montenegro. There will be no help from the West. That makes the task of the opposition urgent and dramatic. Montenegro needs to right itself, now.
The applause won’t echo for long
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s address to Congress yesterday was in sharp contrast to President Biden’s brief address from the Oval Office. Biden said he sacrificed himself for the sake of his country. Netanyahu is ready to sacrifice his country for himself.
The unmerited applause
The Congress members present, who were mostly Republicans, reacted positively to Netanyahu’s presentation. They applauded at virtually every sentence. There was particular enthusiasm for his introduction of wounded Israeli soldiers, one of whom was Druze and one Muslim. They represent however a small fraction of the force, especially at the officer level.
More important are the ultra-orthodox who serve in the IDF. Netanyahu did not mention them. The US has threatened their Netzah Yehuda (Judah’s victory) battalion with sanctions for their behavior on the West Bank. The US has already sanctioned settlers there. The IDF record of accountability for war crimes is weak. Its “much-vaunted “fact-finding mechanism” results in precious few indictments.
Quite a few Democrats, including the Vice President, absented themselves from the speech. Michigan Representative Rashida Tlaib held up a sign saying “war criminal.” Vermont Senator Sanders called Netanyahu a war criminal in advance of his speech:
Other things Netanyahu omitted
The Prime Minister neglected to mention other important things:
- His own responsibility for the intelligence and security lapses on October 7.
- The Israel Defense Forces have freed few hostages in rescue operations.
- The hostages freed so far have overwhelmingly been freed in negotiated exchanges with Hamas.
- A ceasefire is needed to enable further exchanges of hostages and prisoners.
- The majority of Israelis support a ceasefire and exchange.
- They also want Netanyahu out. He continues the war in order to prevent that.
- First-hand accounts of the IDF targeting of children and civilians in Gaza.
- Settler violence, supported by the IDF, in the West Bank against Palestinians.
- The expanding war with Lebanese Hizbollah in the north and Yemeni Houthis in the South.
- Iran becoming a nuclear threshold state because of Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal.
Yes, the Hamas attack was barbarous
I can agree with Netanyahu that the October 7 Hamas attack was barbarous. But Israel’s response has not been civilized. It has been excessive and ineffective. That is a particularly bad combination. Israelis know this and want him out. Most Americans also have little or no confidence in Netanyahu. The applause in Congress won’t echo for long.
Advantage Harris, but the set isn’t over
Those who imagined Kamala Harris lacked charisma and enough time to build the momentum required to run for President have already proven wrong, less than 48 hours after she became the candidate. The campaign has already taken in more than $100 million in smaller donations and even more in large ones. Tiktoks of the dancing Vice President are all over the web. The Democratic Party has united in backing her. She can win.
Republicans are having trouble finding more than her boisterous laugh to criticize. To be sure, Donald Trump is calling her a socialist and extremist. That isn’t finding much traction when applied to a career prosecutor. The contrast with his 34 felony convictions, giant civil judgments against him, and his criminal indictments is dramatic:
What Americans want
What a large slice of American wants is the Biden Administration without Biden. They want the health care provided by Obamacare. They want the access to abortion that Trump’s Supreme Court nominees took away. The pace of inflation is way down and continuing to decline while employment is holding up reasonable well. They like that, even if they complain about price levels. They don’t complain about Biden’s tax policies, which have increased taxes on the rich and reduced them on the middle class. America’s recovery from COVID has outpaced other major countries:
On foreign policy, Americans want support for Ukraine and Israel, while hoping for an early end to their wars. Support for NATO is strong. So too is support for Taiwan and other allies in the Pacific.
They would get none of that from Trump
Trump would disappoint Americans on all those fronts. He has doubted the value of US alliances in both Asia and Europe. He has even suggested that South Korea and Japan should get their own nuclear weapons, rather than sit under the US umbrella. Taiwan would have to defend itself from China.
Trump has repeatedly vowed to end Obamacare, vaunted his Supreme Court nominees, and presided over a confused and ineffective response to COVID-19. His minions have prepared plans to fire tens of thousands of competent civil servants. He intends to reduce taxes on the super rich and increase them on the middle class, via his 10% tariff.
Ad Harris
So Harris is having a good week. Trump is having such a bad one he is reportedly wondering whether he can dump JD Vance as vice presidential candidate. If you don’t get that right, are you qualified to be president?
Harris’ first big decision is likewise choosing a vice president. There is ample talent available. The question is who will help her with the most Electoral Votes. I don’t pretend to know, but I won’t be surprised if it is someone from North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin.
I’ve got friends who suggest it should be a Republican, even Mitt Romney or Liz Cheney. That would be unlikely to please the Democratic base. It’s an idea that will need to await the formation of a cabinet next year.
The long road to November
Sustaining momentum is difficult. Harris will need some future projects to talk about during he campaign. She may focus on the bipartisan immigration legislation that Trump blocked from passing in the House. She will surely push for a clearer path to citizenship for undocumented people, especially those brought to the US as children. Student loan forgiveness is another possibility, as is legislation on national rules for abortion and limits on presidential immunity.
The Democrats are fortunate that their convention is August 19-22, which gives Harris time not only to pick her vice president but also to try to ensure that the convention goes smoothly. I was in Chicago for the 1968 convention that went south. Demonstrations are to be expected. The police need to handle them well. Getting a prominent Republican or two to speak at the convention would be a good idea. Cheney or Kinzinger or fit there well, not because of policy positions. They know who Trump is and are willing to say it plainly.
There is no telling what may happen by fall. Biden and Harris will need to be in sync. She has already demonstrated that she is quick. Now she needs to demonstrate that she can manage a unifying convention, a big campaign, and Trump’s unrestrained attacks.
PS: Here is they guy who wasn’t sharp enough to be president:
The regional war is likely to intensify
With Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu about to address the US Congress, it is time for an assessment of where things stand currently in the Middle East. Israel is fighting Arab opponents on four fronts. In Gaza, it is fighting Hamas and killing a lot of civilians. In the north, Israel is fighting Hizbollah and sometimes Syria. In the south Yemen’s Ansar al Allah (the Houthis in a word) has taken up the cudgels against Israel and shipping in the Red Sea. And on the West Bank, settlers and the security forces are fighting Palestinian civilians.
Iran stands behind it all
Iran supports all of Israel’s opponents, the “axis of resistance,” in the Middle East and North Africa. It supplies training and equipment as well as some degree of central coordination and financing. Hamas, Hizbollah, the Houthis may each have their own interests and initiatives, but they are broadly consistent with Iran’s denial of the legitimacy of the Israeli state and its objective of destroying it in favor of a one-state solution on the entire territory of Palestine.
From Tehran’s perspective, the fighting is a good deal. It is confronting its sworn enemy using non-Iranian forces not on Iranian territory. Only once, in April, has Iran tried to attack Israel with its own missiles and drones, in response to an attack on an Iranian diplomatic facility. Israel responded, but in a way that did not escalate the direct tit for tat.
The fourth front
The fourth front in the current fighting is the West Bank. There Israel is not only fighting armed resistance, some of which might or might not be connected to Iran. It has unleashed Israeli settlers, who are establishing new outposts, destroying Palestinian property, and killing Palestinians. 2023 was an especially bad year but 2024 is not far off the pace.
The West Bank fighting redounds to Iran’s benefit as well. It keeps Israeli security forces busy and makes it difficult for the Palestinian Authority, a secular organization with little connection to Tehran, to claim it can effectively govern.
Arab states are mostly maintaining the peace
Egypt and Jordan are maintaining their peace agreements with Israel. Saudi Arabia is continuing to pursue a similar accommodation, albeit one that would necessarily open a path to a Palestinian state. It would also need to give Saudi Arabia a formal US security guarantee of some sort. Iraq talks tough but is not either willing or capable of joining the fight. Turkey has suspended trade with Israel and speaks up for the Palestinians, but it is unwilling to go further. Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan are more or less maintaining their “Abrahamic” agreements with Israel, though Khartoum may rethink that after its civil war.
Qatar is acting as a mediator, along with Egypt, in talks that engage both Hamas and Israel. While often accused of supporting Hamas, Doha views its relations with Hamas as fulfilling requests of the US government, as does Cairo. Egyptian President Sisi is no friend of the Muslim Brotherhood, which gave birth to Hamas.
Hamas has survived, many hostages haven’t
The immediate cause of the current fighting was Hamas’ ferocious, unconventional attack on Israel last October 7, which killed about 1200 people. Israelis understood that to be an existential threat. Its ferocious conventional response has killed in the past 8 months about 40,000 Palestinians and others, according to the Hamas health ministry.
Israel’s main objective is to eradicate Hamas’ military and governing capabilities. Hamas appears to have survived the intense bombing campaign and numerous ground incursions. While there are signs of dissatisfaction with Hamas among Gazans, polling has not confirmed that sentiment.
Israel also seeks release of hostages seized on October 7. Netanyahu claims military pressure will achieve that. Many Israelis prefer a deal. Hamas or other Palestinian groups still hold about 120. More than 100 were released in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israel. Few have been rescued. Dozens have been killed.
No agreement means the regional war will intensify
Prime Minister Netanyahu, apparently against the wishes of many in his government, has refused to sign on to a proposed ceasefire agreement with Hamas that the Americans say originated with Israel. Hamas claims to have agreed, but it appears to be asking for changes as well. There is no sign of a real agreement emerging.
Many in Israel wanted Netanyahu to sign on before coming to Washington. He did not do that. It seems unlikely he will sign on during his visit, if only because doing so would help the Democrats. Netanyahu has allied himself firmly with Donald Trump. I expect his address in Congress to be more of the same fire and brimstone that he preaches in Israel.
The result will be more fighting in all four directions. The Houthis are unbowed. Lebanese Hizbollah is less belligerent but will have little choice if Israel continues to kill its commanders. Hamas hopes its continuing resistance will give it traction not only in Gaza but also on the West Bank, where the settlers can be expected to continue rampaging.
Hamas reportedly agreed in Beijing this week to join the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), recognizing it as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people (a key provision of the Oslo accords with Israel). Such reconciliation agreements have not stuck in the past. If this one does, it could put the Palestinians in a better position to negotiate with Israel, or it could incentivize the Israelis to continue the fighting. Or both. Stay tuned.
Time for tough love in the Balkans
Friends in the Balkans wonder what the candidacy of Kamala Harris will mean for them. There is precious little direct evidence to go on. But some things are obvious. Biden’s withdrawal was no surprise. Nor was his endorsement of Harris. But her attitude towards the Balkans is anyone’s guess. Here is mine.
Extrapolating
Harris is a strong supporter of Ukraine’s struggle against the Russian invasion. She will want to see Kyiv win and Moscow lose. She won’t settle easily for partition. That attitude will likely transfer to the Balkans. I wouldn’t want to be the one telling a female, Black, and Indian President that people of different ethnicities can’t live together.
Harris is also hawkish on China, like Biden as well as Trump. Kosovo may look like Taiwan (and Ukraine) to her. That would mean it needs to be nurtured and defended from territorial claims by a former sovereign. She is unlikely to be sympathetic to the Association of Serb-majority Municipalities or the autonomy of Republika Srpska. Someone needs to advise her early and often that both are bad ideas.
Still extrapolating
This fall’s campaign and election in the US will be in large part about preserving liberal democracy, that is democracy based on equal individual rights protected by the rule of law. Those who want support from her Administration should be aligning themselves with that objective. Partitionists and ethnic separatists should take heed.
The Biden Administration has adopted a policy of appeasement towards Serbia. There is however no reason why Harris should continue it. President Vucic has oriented Belgrade eastward, aligning himself with China, Russia, and other autocracies, including Azerbaijan and Hungary. Serbian munition supplies to Ukraine are worth something, but they will likely flow for economic reasons even if the political soft soaping is ended.
Appeasement has manifestly failed. It is time for tough love. That’s something Harris’ hard-edged temperament will find amenable.
Who’s is charge?
While writing this post, I learned that Alexander Kasanof will be the deputy assistant secretary of state in the European bureau responsible for both the Balkans and public diplomacy. That combination is an innovation.
President Harris is unlikely to spend much quality time on the Balkans. People lower down in the bureaucracy count. Jim O’Brien will clearly remain engaged. I don’t know Kasanof, but his background in Ukraine may well be a plus for those who would like the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all the current Balkan states reinforced. Besides, he is a Johns Hopkins/SAIS graduate. Let’s hope he knows about tough love. I wish him well!
The Russian invasion of Ukraine, to date
The Russian invasion of Ukraine started on February 24, 2022. It is now two and a half years since then. The Russians started with overwhelming advantages in equipment, money, manpower, and geography. How has it gone? How might it go in the future?
Geography matters
On the eve of the invasion, the Russians had troops poised to Ukraine’s north in Belarus, east in Donbas, and south in Crimea. Ukraine was poorly defended in the north and south. The Russian armored column aimed at Kyiv, only 100 miles from the Belarus border, proceeded well. The Russians made it to the suburbs and the airport before the Ukrainians stopped them and decimated their lengthy armored column as well as the forces they intended to deploy at the airport.
Despite weeks of effort, the Russians failed to take Kharkiv, a Russian-speaking city less than twenty miles from the Ukraine/Russia border. The Russians were more successful in Donbas and the south, where they advanced, respectively, westward from territory occupied in 2014 and northward from Crimea. The fall of Mariupol in May 2022 was a major defeat for Ukraine.
The Russians largely held on to their gains in the south and east, but the Ukrainians stopped them from taking all of Donestk and short of Odesa. Ukrainian boat drones sank the flag ship of the Russian Black Sea fleet. A Ukrainian offensive in the summer of 2022 failed to make more than marginal gains in the south, but it forced the Russians to leave the east poorly defended. That enabled a Ukrainian offensive that retook a substantial area near Kharkiv by fall. Kyiv then also managed to retake Kherson in the south.
Stalemate
Since then, the confrontation lines have moved little. Russian forces during 2023 dug in, preparing multiple lines of defensive fortifications along the 600-mile front. Only in the winter of 2023/24 and spring of 2024 did Russia gain significant territory near Kharkiv. That was courtesy of the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, which held up assistance to Kyiv, and the Biden Administration, which blocked Ukraine from bombarding staging areas inside Russia. Once aid started to flow again, the Biden Administration authorized Kyiv to strike the staging areas. The Ukrainians within weeks began pushing the Russians back to the border. They have also forced the Russian Black Sea fleet out of Crimea.
In short, neither the Russians nor the Ukrainians have much to show for the past year or even two. The Ukrainians have foiled the Russians’ most ambitious hopes: to take Kyiv, Kharkiv, or Odesa, But the Ukrainians have been unable to roll back the Russians from territory gained in 2014 in the east and in 2022 in the south.
People matter too
As notable as the geography is the sociology. Ukrainians mostly fled west to Ukrainian-speaking areas as well as European Union member states rather than Russia and Belarus. There were instances of spying for, and defections to, Russia from the security services. But the Russian-speaking population, including the President, mostly chose loyalty to Kyiv. Support among Ukrainians for continuing the war flagged some in 2023. And it is weaker in the east and south where most of the ground fighting has taken place. But continuing the fight has remained the majority view. Throughout, support for President Zelensky and for regaining control of 100% of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, has remained high.
Russian human rights abuses during and after combat were rife. These included murder of civilians and prisoners of war, shelling of civilian targets, kidnapping and trafficking of Ukrainian children, and pillage. The Russians did not spare Russian-speaking Kharkiv and Mariupol, where indiscriminate attacks and other abuses were intense. Russian President Putin nevertheless proceeded in September 2022 with annexation of Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson, despite not controlling their entire territory.
A more authoritarian Russia turns to totalitarians for help
The war in Ukraine has also had global repercussions. In Russia, it has enabled President Putin–reelected with a ridiculous 87% of the vote in March 2024–to widen his autocracy. He has chased liberal media and civil society from the country, ended any pretense of an independent judiciary, and murdered political opponents. The Russian governing system has earned the epithet “hybrid totalitarianism,” which requires not only obedience but also vocal support.
Moscow has turned to much-sanctioned Iran and North Korea to acquire weapons. While China hasn’t supplied weapons systems, Russia depends on Beijing for political support, oil and gas sales, and dual-use components. Thus Moscow’s westward thrust into Ukraine has increased its political, economic, and military dependency on Asia while cutting it off from the West.
The West rediscovers geopolitics
In the U.S., the 2022 invasion reawakened concern about Russian intentions and European security. But it also generated among some Republicans a return to isolationism reminiscent of the 20th century inter-war era. President Biden attempted to forestall the invasion by releasing classified information concerning the Russian preparations. He also mobilized NATO to provide massive military, economic, and humanitarian assistance to Kyiv and the EU to sanction Moscow.
NATO has deployed additional forces along the easternmost flank of the Alliance. European NATO members are raising their defense budgets and planning responses to any future Russian moves against Moldova or Alliance members on its eastern flank. Concern about Russian territorial ambitions gave Finland and Sweden a strong push toward joining NATO and the EU good reason to reduce dependence on Russian energy.
The unipolar moment of Pax Americana was short. It reigned uncontested only a decade or so until 9/11. It then ended definitively with the withdrawal from Iraq by the end of 2011. Now Russia and China are not just building up their capacities but also using them. Russia is applying in Ukraine the skills it acquired in Syria after deploying its air force there in 2015. China is flexing its muscles in the South China Sea and near Taiwan.
The division of the world will not be so neat as during the Cold War. India, Hungary, and Serbia, for example, are trying to straddle the growing divide between East and West, as the Philippines did in the Pacific during the presidency of Rodrigo Duerte. Much of the global South likewise aims to hedge and extract benefits from both East and West.
The East is doomed, but the West may not fare well either
Hard as it may be to picture on any given day, the contest between East and West has a foreseeable eventual outcome. The Russian economy, though growing faster than anticipated, is increasingly dependent on oil and gas exports to gain funds for military expenditures that do not benefit consumers. China faces a major financial crisis. Its local governments are deeply in hock. Both countries are in dramatic demographic decline. The Iranian theocracy is aging and limping economically, crippled by sanctions. North Korea is a nuclear armed totalitarian state that keeps its population in dire poverty. If these were the main threats to liberal democracy, we would have little to fear.
But they are not. The main threats to the West are internal. Racism, protectionism, populism, and charlatanism are combining with greed, corruption, inequity, and disinformation to produce political forces that aspire to permanence in power. Liberal democracy is at risk in both the US and Europe, where only centrist right/left coalitions are keeping extremists out of power. The decisive factor in the Ukraine war may no longer Russia’s staying power, but rather the West’s. The Ukrainians will continue to fight, but they will have the means only if we continue to support them. That is only one reason why the election of Kamala Harris is vital.