My Balkanite friends are clamoring to know what is going to happen tomorrow when Serbian President Vucic and Kosovo Prime Minister Kurti meet once again. The Europeans and Americans are pressing hard for a “normalization” agreement. No one knows quite what that means.
But I have some ideas about how to evaluate whatever happens tomorrow. These come from my personal perspective, which supports the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence of Kosovo. Those who imagine Serbia ever again governing Kosovo, or annexing part of its territory, need read no further.
My assessment criteria include these:
Improved state-to-state relations
Normalization should mean making the relationship between Serbia and Kosovo more like a “normal” state-to-state relationship between respectful neighbors. This requires agreement, at least in principle, on the line of control between them. A commitment to agree and demarcate that line would be a clear positive signal. Normalization should also mean forswearing the threat or use of force to settle disputes. Serbia has recently mobilized its army and threatened the use of force in response to imagined abuses against Serbs in Kosovo.
Good neighbors need however to do more than respect a line and not use force or threats of it. They need also to respect their neighbor’s state institutions. This applies in particular to Belgrade. Serbian state security and other personnel remain in the Serb communities inside Kosovo. The situation is especially egregious in the four northern municipalities contiguous with Serbia. But Serbian security agents intimidate Serbs throughout Kosovo who seek to join the Kosovo Security Force (KSF) and other Kosovo institutions.
Belgrade should welcome, not resist, the recruitment of Serbs into the KSF and other Kosovo institutions, especially the police and judiciary. Return of the Serbs to those institutions in northern Kosovo should be a touchstone in assessing whatever is agreed. So too, should be elections in the northern municipalities, held under the authority of Pristina.
Reciprocity
Reciprocity is a critical dimension of any state-to-state relations. It has been lacking in the loud international community insistence on the formation inside Kosovo of an Association of Serb-majority Municipalities (ASM). Pristina has asked for a reciprocal Association of Albanian-majority Municipalities inside Serbia with comparable powers, but Belgrade has not welcomed that idea. Pristina is also insisting that the ASM be formed consistent with the Kosovo constitution. That would mean without executive powers and without a sectarian name. It would be a purely consultative body not limited to Serb participation.
Serbia however wants the ASM as a means of permanent control over the Serbs in Kosovo and leverage over the Kosovo state. It has no intention of conceding anything comparable to the Albanian population in southern Serbia. If a unilateral ASM with executive powers is permitted, you can expect trouble not only in Kosovo but also in Bosnia and Herzegovina. There the main Serb leader has said bluntly it would be a prelude to independence for the 49% of the territory known as Republika Srpska.
If the ASM were to be formed before Belgrade recognition of Kosovo in an agreement generated by the US and the EU, that would give the ASM even more implicit EU approval than the Kosovo state itself. No government in Pristina should want that to happen. The ASM should be formed only after Serbian (and presumably then all-EU) recognition.
International engagement
If implementation is left up to Belgrade and Pristina, the results will be predictably minimal. They have already spent more than 10 years discussing the Brussels agreement that introduced the ASM and called for application of the Kosovo police and judicial systems in the northern municipalities. Unless the international community seriously engages, we can expect no better in the next 10 years.
That engagement can come in several forms. One would be formation of an implementation task force in which the EU and US act as guarantors, prepared to intervene actively and effectively in pointing out implementation failures of that sort. A body of this sort could deliver on promises American officials have already made ensuring the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence of Kosovo. The International Civilian Office that supervised Kosovo’s implementation of the Ahtisaari Plan after independence might be a model.
Another form of international engagement would be recognition by the five EU states that have not already done so. That could soften the blow of unilateral formation of the ASM, without a comparable association inside Serbia. All five might be more than one can hope for, but several would be good. Even one would be desirable. None will lead to serious disappointment in Kosovo.
NATO could make its position on future Kosovo membership, after its army is fully accredited in 2027, clear and unequivocal.
Financing is another possibility. Serbia has already received a major grant for railway reconstruction. Kosovo has received nothing comparable. It should.
Minimal outcome
Serbian President Vucic has for years fed Serbia’s tabloids a diet of anti-Albanian racism that has fired up his nationalist opposition. That includes expressing his personal regret that Serbia released Prime Minister Kurti from prison. Russian bots and agents pitch in frequently. Kurti indulges in less overt hate speech. He also has more support at home for an agreement, but only if it does not infringe on Kosovo’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. He is implacable on that subject.
One or the other leader, or both, may walk away from tomorrow’s meeting unwilling to sign. Either would likely increase in domestic popularity if he did so. Democracy, in this case, is the enemy of conflict resolution, because the leaders have not prepared their constiuents for compromise. Only international pressures and inducements can compensate for domestic unhappiness. The US and EU, if they get an agreement, will need to continue to engage.
PS: As I have left out mention of Ukraine, let this letter from Prime Minister Kurti to President Zelensky fill the gap:
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I republish here, with occasional videos of my choice. To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).
Last Wednesday I published a popular piece on Ugly Diplomacy in the Balkans. The “hook” of the piece was a recent agreement to create liaison positions for Serbian diplomats in the State Department. I was critical of that decision because I assumed that Kosovo diplomats had not yet been offered the same opportunity. I was wrong.
Mea culpa
I have been informed that a Kosovo diplomat has been working in the State Department since early 2022. A second started working there in January 2023. That information is available in tweets from Embassy Pristina that I had missed. I welcome this news and hasten to acknowledge my incorrect assumption.
One of the Kosovars is working in Educational and Cultural Affairs. I haven’t had an answer to my inquiry about the other or the Serbs.
The Secretary of State is tweeting nonsense
None of that changes my view of the the current diplomacy pursued at State vis-a-vis Serbia. The State Department is anteing up goodies for Belgrade well before it has done what we would like on Ukraine and many other issues. I know of no backing for this tweet from Secretary Blinken:
Had a productive conversation with Serbian President @AVucic today at the @MunSecConf. We discussed the importance of normalized relations with Kosovo and I conveyed our appreciation for Serbia’s continued support for Ukraine. We share Serbia’s desire for a future with the EU.
This is nonsense. President Vucic, who has aligned himself increasingly with Moscow and Beijing, so far as I am aware has done little or nothing in the West’s favor on Ukraine, other than vote for a couple of helpuful but toothless UN General Assembly resolutions. He hasn’t done a whole lot on normalization with Kosovo or EU accession either.
The Americans don’t care
But the Americans don’t care. Witness Washington’s full-throated support for Serbia’s Open Balkans initiative and its much-vaunted proposal for an Association of Serb-majority Municipalities inside Kosovo. Many in the region perceive both these propositions as threats to the territorial integrity of neighbors.
Washington support for Belgrade contrasts sharply with the pressure Washington is bringing to bear on our friends in Pristina, who aren’t getting nice photo ops with the Secretary or full-throated praise for their successful anti-corruption efforts or their acceptance of the French-German proposal on normalization as a basis for negotiations.
Ugly is still ugly
So yes, I was wrong in my assumption about Kosovo diplomats inside the State Department. They are already there. But it is still ugly diplomacy when you reward people who refuse to do what you want and pressure your friends. I know it is easier to twist the arm of your friend than your adversary, but it is still ugly.
Today’s Serbia National Day message from the State Department includes this tidbit:
I am pleased our two countries recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding to create liaison positions for Serbian diplomats within the U.S. Department of State. This unique program will not only foster a better understanding of our respective foreign policy goals and objectives but will forge new channels of communication and build lasting partnerships.
This comes after avowal of support for Serbia’s EU ambitions and the umpteenth plea for Serbia to support Ukraine.
Where this leads
Serbia is not an allied country. It is not a member of NATO or a major non-NATO ally and has a policy of military neutrality. It has not joined the Western sanctions against Russia for its aggression against Ukraine. In fact, Belgrade is largely out of alignment with EU foreign policies it has promised to respect.
But the State Department has decided it can “win over” Belgrade. It is doing so by providing goodies up front. State is supporting Belgrade’s “Open Balkans” initiative, which aims at removing border barriers between Serbia and Serb populations in neighboring countries. State is also supporting Belgrade’s proposal to separate governance of the Serb-majority population of Kosovo from Pristina’s authority through creation of an Association of Serb-majority Municipalities.
That will create another de facto “Republika Srpska.” Bosnia’s Republika Srpska is now preparing to refuse the authority of Sarajevo’s courts. We can expect the same in Kosovo, if the Association is formed with the executive powers Belgrade seeks.
Ugly diplomacy
There is, sadly, more to the illogic of what the Americans are doing. Washington says it is supporting the EU-sponsored dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. That aims at “normalization” of their relations. Having Serbian foreign service officers in the State Department while the dialogue proceeds will arouse understandable suspicions in Kosovo.
Such liaison officers learn a great deal about the inner workings of US diplomacy. Even if assigned to roles far from the European Bureau, the signal Washington is sending is clear: we favor Serbia’s perspective in the dialogue. The only way to make this move palatable is to offer the same to Kosovo in two days time, when it is Kosovo national day.
The heavy lean of the Americans toward Belgrade is ugly diplomacy. It favors the less friendly party while making the more friendly party uncomfortable. Washington expects its favors to Belgrade returned in some indefinite future, while demanding Pristina agree to Open Balkans and the Association right now. It won’t be hard for Belgrade to agree to “normalization” that includes validation of Serbia’s authority over the Kosovo Serb population. Once that is done, Serbia will expect the analog in Bosnia and Montenegro.
What Washington isn’t doing is delivering what Kosovo wants: Serbian recognition and membership in the United Nations. “Normalization” could come to mean international recognition for the Association of Serb-majority Municipalities but not for Kosovo’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is hard to imagine a worse outcome for Pristina.
I never had a source assaulted in front of me until today when an Israeli soldier who stopped my interview did this with a Palestinian peace activist Issa Amro in Hebron. I can't stop thinking how dehumanizing the occupation is on the young soldiers charged with enforcing it. pic.twitter.com/Qrsa1UJsfA
I don’t have the time, energy, or expertise to deal with what the Israeli government is currently up to. But fortunately Jeremy Ben-Ami, the President of J Street does. He sent this message today:
For fifteen years, J Street has been warning of the dire threat posed to the future of Israel — its democracy, its values and its security — by the agenda of far-right ultranationalists and religious zealots.
We have spoken out about these looming threats because we care so deeply about the state and the people of Israel who are our family, our friends and our colleagues.
We’ve centered our work opposing settlements, demolitions and creeping annexation precisely on the point that never-ending occupation will ultimately take a toll on the occupier, not just on the occupied — and will lead to the erosion of Israel’s very democracy itself.
Sadly, the far-right — and the settlement movement at its core — that has single-mindedly pursued permanent control over the West Bank and dominance over the Palestinian people is now firmly in control of the government of Israel. Since taking office six weeks ago, they are moving at lightning speed to enact their agenda, threatening to make Israel unrecognizable to millions of Jews and others in the United States who care deeply about the country and its people, and who believe in the democratic values on which it was founded.
The actions now being taken by Israel’s government make its agenda clear to see: To ensure the coalition’s founding commitment to undemocratic control over all the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, they are advancing plans to undermine the very legal and democratic foundations of the state.
The so-called “judicial reform” package under Knesset consideration should be understood as part and parcel of the right’s annexationist agenda.
Thankfully, Israelis are taking to the streets to fight for their democracy and the rule of law. Former Prime Ministers, security chiefs and Supreme Court justices — and even the current President of Israel — are sounding the alarm. They understand that this is the most vital inflection point in Israel’s 75 years, one that will fundamentally shape the country going forward.
The sight of hundreds of thousands of Israelis in the streets, striking and protesting against the government’s plans, fills us with pride. J Street stands with the protesters in our commitment to the State of Israel and the values on which it was founded.
Here in the US, many Jewish communal and pro-Israel leaders have been slower to respond to these radical developments than we would have hoped. Perhaps some of these leaders held out hope that the worst would not come to pass. Some feared their critiques might be counterproductive. Others said that, even though US support has been vital to Israel’s development and survival, it is somehow inappropriate — even now — for Jewish Americans to criticize the policies of the Israeli government, or for the US government to meaningfully oppose those policies.
There is no longer any room or time for hesitation or excuses.
As Sunday’s cabinet meeting made clear, the government is moving full speed ahead: Advancing anti-democratic legislation that strikes at the core of the country’s commitment to the rule of law, legalizing illegal outposts, planning to expand settlements drastically, and transforming how the territory occupied in 1967 is administered.
These changes must be called what they are: De facto annexation of occupied Palestinian territory and a subversion of Israel’s democracy.
It is the moral and historic obligation of the leaders of American Jewish institutions to speak out clearly and immediately to challenge the actions being taken by this government.
Policymakers too must act. The Biden Administration must make clear to Israel — as a longtime and very close ally — that it will no longer stand in the way when the international community moves to hold Israel accountable under international law for its actions. Congress and the President must finally start to exercise far greater oversight to ensure that no US arms or taxpayer dollars are being used to further Israel’s de facto and illegal annexation of occupied territory.
To be pro-Israel in 2023 means standing with the hundreds of thousands of brave Israelis taking to the streets to defend their democracy. It means fighting to preserve the values that underpin the US-Israel relationship. It means standing up against the nightmare of permanent occupation and conflict.
Most importantly, it means confronting the troubling reality that, today, one of the greatest threats to Israel comes from the extremism of its own government.
I’ll be heading to Israel and the West Bank myself this week with a large delegation of Members of Congress and J Street leaders. I’ll be sure to share further thoughts with you on how things look from the region — and how our movement can continue to struggle for the better future we believe in.
RSS - Posts
