Interview: Doug Henderson, former UK Minister of Defense
“I do not think the greatest world powers – America, Britain, France, Russia and China – will conflict over Kosovo. But they see the problems of migration, which is on the verge of the rest of Europe. Greece wants peace and stability, as well as Italy. The common opinion is that the Kosovo problem should be solved in the Balkans, and then, as former Yugoslavia, to have stable relationships with others in Europe. Tito did it 40 years ago. The U.S. and the EU would have wanted a stable region in the Balkans. I think that the Balkan countries, in terms of stability, should influence each other,” states Henderson during his visit to Belgrade at the end of last week.
You said that the greatest world powers will not enter in the conflict over Kosovo. Why then do the same great powers recognise Kosovo as an independent state, especially in light of the fact that Kosovo has been under UN administration, which was in direct violation of international law?
The vision of most countries was that the impasse must be broken, or that the ‘dead end street’ must have a way out. Britain and other EU countries knew that not all EU countries will recognise Kosovo as an independent state. It was, however, the only way to get out from the dead end street and the situation in the Balkans is calm, i.e. countries benefit from the protection of NATO and EU membership. This is not the end of the process, but only the beginning. I think that Pristina and Belgrade should agree that their differences should not be an obstacle to Europeanise and enter the EU. That would be a step forward. If Serbia wants to be in the EU, then any possible conflict with Kosovo could be an obstacle to its accession.
How do you see the position of Serbia in relation to NATO and to Russia?
Germany and Great Britain were at war until 1944. But they are both in NATO since the early fifties. Things are changing. I think we have to look at the historical context. If Serbia wants to be like any other European state, a stable as well militarily and politically independent, and keep this position, it must emulate other European countries. The Serbian Prime Minister said that there is “no return”, meaning that if you want Europeanisation, connecting with European universities, independent and stable economy, and to safely invest, considering all cultural and traditional differences, you need to become an official member of European institutions – NATO and the EU. The OSCE and the UN is easy to join, because there are not a lot of obligations, but membership in NATO and the EU brings commitments. EU has already given Serbia enough “sympathy”. It is easier to join NATO than the EU, and Serbia has to decide whether it will join the Alliance. I understand the historical background and the resistance of the Serbian public, but as I said, Britain and Germany were at war in 1944, and have become allies.
How, as a former defense minister in the cabinet of Prime Minister Tony Blair, do you see NATO having bombed Serbia?
It’s not something that Britain or NATO wanted to do. If I was in the place of Slobodan Milosevic I would have accepted to negotiate. Personally I was very surprised when he agreed to the agreement (Rambouillet). The only consequence of the agreement would be the fall of his government. It was a really, really bad tactical decision. NATO had no desire to be involved in military activities it later was. If you look at history, these things happen when people do not accept agreements.
Do you think that it was necessary to bomb Yugoslavia in 1999?
There was no need to intervene militarily …but Milosevic didn’t even try to reach a settlement. You have to view military tactics as what is necessary, and what is not. And for that you need to ask the army not me. The bombing was minimal. It was not heavy bombing,.. but every bombing is bad, especially for civilians. But it happens in all military interventions.
The biggest objection was that you prevent violation of human rights exactly by violating the human rights of those who violate them?
There was a discussion about it, but people were dying. And probably from both communities – Albanian and Serbian. NATO wanted to stop the killing and prevent mass atrocities.
Did you know that Clinton, Blair and other NATO leaders were once sentenced in Serbia to 20 years in prison for the bombing of Yugoslavia?
I never thought about it.
Can you predict what might happen in the next 20 years in the Balkans?
Lets predict the result of football match! I think that Balkans countries will be real European countries. Britain is not exactly the center of Europe, but culturally it belongs to it, as well as people like me who are committed to the concept of European peace and stability in Europe. There are many debates in the UK about the people in the Balkans and whether they are aggressive nationalists. However, I think most people are for Europeanisation, because you cannot be eternally preoccupied with minor local differences. You have to look at the big picture and think about how to fit into it.
Many people in Serbia think that the great powers – the U.S., Britain, Germany – still punish Serbia for its role in the wars of the nineties in former Yugoslavia. What do you think?
No, there is no incentive to do so. If you want peace, you need a permanent investment. I cannot speak on behalf of the British government, but Britain wants Serbia to be included in the EU. That does not necessarily mean that Serbia should join NATO. It depends on Serbia whether or not it will join NATO and the EU. And, as I understand it, there is a consensus for Serbia to join the EU.
