LOCAL PRESS

Nikolic close to a final version of his platform for Kosovo (Novosti)

The platform for Kosovo and Metohija, which is prepared by Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic, is close to a final version and it should propose a lasting status solution for Serbia’s southern province, Novosti unofficially learns. Novosti was told by the president’s cabinet that this document would define the position of the Serbian province and recognize three situations on the ground: a part with a Serb majority, a part with an Albanian majority and a part where the Albanians are a majority but with municipalities with a Serb majority. “The new document should be a proposal of a lasting status solution in the interests of all those living in Kosovo and Metohija and the intention was not to be a ‘thorn in anyone’s eye’,” Novosti was told by the president’s cabinet. The new plan will envisage the widest possible autonomy for Kosovo and Metohija and it will not require amendments to the Constitution, thus nor a referendum. The goal is to ensure legal safety and an organized system in Kosovo and Metohija, to define the manner of an administration that concerns most of all the Serbs in the province. “The platform will be the President’s vision of the resolution of Kosovo’s status issue. This should be a joint stand of both the president and the government, and it should be confirmed in the parliament. Once it receives confirmation, it will be binding, especially in view of the signing of agreements on the normalization of Belgrade-Pristina relations. Belgrade is expected to present a stand on how it sees the future relations and needs to reach on this the widest possible consensus in Serbia,” the cabinet told Novosti. The state leadership will estimate when the right moment is to publish it. The issue of Kosovo’s future status must be resolved on the basis of fundamental principles and norms of international law, while striving for a peaceful, comprehensive and lasting solution, Novosti’s sources note.

Vucic: EU path depends from dialogue with Kosovo Albanians (RTS)

In the broadcast “Question Mark” of Radio and Television of Serbia (RTS), Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic said that when it comes to Serbia’s EU path, it is determined by how successful we will be regarding the issue of negotiations with Pristina in Brussels, and that they are the hardest possible talks. He pointed out that the government was doing everything possible in order to progress on Serbia’s EU path and for the opening of chapters in the negotiations with the EU, but that there are no lies – the most important thing on this issue is the dialogue with the Kosovo Albanians. He repeats that Serbia is on the EU path and that it is Serbia’s strategic orientation, but that he cannot accept to hand over, for example, everything at Gazivode to the Albanians. “We all know that 24 percent of Gazivode is on the territory of Serbia proper, and we are supposed to give them all the water, for the Kosovo Serbs to have no say in the matter. I don’t want and I will not give,” said Vucic. Asked whether the Serbs should return to Kosovo institutions, Vucic says this would not be a problem if the Albanians fulfill the coalition conditions. “We want to enter Kosovo institutions, because we would have a better view of the game and influence, we want to talk with them, but we can’t enter Kosovo institutions before those who promised they would something do this,” said Vucic.

Vulin: Deliberate pogrom against Serbs (Beta)

The commemorative academy “The Pogrom in Kosovo and Metohija” was held at the Serbian National Theatre within the marking of the anniversary of the violence against the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija. Serbian Minister of Labor Aleksandar Vulin said in the speech that 17 March 2004 was a deliberate, never punished pogrom against the Serbs that was launched by “a huge, horrible lie that has never been rebutted”. “That 17 March was not random hatred, was not an accident, it was a planned, deliberate, never punished pogrom against the Serbs, the days when churches, monasteries and houses were demolished, and people murdered in madness, and the day when 21,000 fully armed soldiers of international forces didn’t manage to protect the Serbs, their sanctities and homes,” said Vulin. He added that the formation of a special war crimes court would be an opportunity to try justly and honestly “those who committed crimes, who set houses on fire, murderers, and destroyers of Serbian sanctities”. “We believe only once and forever in our flag, country, judge, in our law and our policeman, and that is why everything we have done, we have done so we are not alone anymore, so nobody would decide about their destiny, because if they decide themselves we will not experience the same crimes anymore,” he said. He wondered how many hundreds of thousand soldiers were needed to prevent the organized violence in which 51,000 people “cleansed everything that wasn’t cleansed under the flag of some other state”. The recipient of the Order of St. Sava of the first degree Jacques Ogar, who was the commander of French special units in Kosovo in 1999, said that “the barbaric March pogrom might have been expected”. The author of the book “Europe Died in Pristina”, Ogar said: “Only those who don’t forget have a future. We may say that memory is a condition for the existence of the future. Tonight, we wish to remember with emotions and affection those who perished and lost homes, churches and monasteries.”

Former Serbian policemen protest (Beta)

Former Serbian policemen protested today in northern Kosovska Mitrovica, requesting the resolution of their status since they had not been admitted in the Kosovo police. The protest was held in front of the Serbian government Office for Kosovo and Metohija. They claim that the Serbian government decree, adopted after the signing of the Brussels agreement, exposes them to various forms of discrimination and that their elementary rights to life, work and freedom of movement are endangered. They submitted their requests to the officials of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija, and addressed them to Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic, Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic, Interior Minister Nebojsa Stefanovic and the Head of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija Marko Djuric. They requested that the employees, who do not accept early retirement, be enabled to return to work in the Serbian Interior Ministry or to integrate into the Kosovo police. The Union of Serbian Police supported the former policemen in their protest. “The Union of Serbian Police has launched an initiative before the Constitutional Court of Serbia for the assessment of constitutionality of the Serbian government decree on your forceful retirement through the implementation of the Brussels agreement, because we are certain that law and justice are on your side,” said the Union’s representative Lazar Ranitovic. The representative of the employees of the Kosovska Mitrovica police administration Rajko Sekularac says that they expect a response within ten days, and if they don’t receive it they announce the blockade of administrative crossings. The protestors walked to Rudare where they blocked the Pristina-Leposavic road for one hour.

Arrests in Serbia over Srebrenica (B92/Beta/Tanjug)

Seven people have been arrested at various locations in Serbia over suspicion that they have committed executions in Kravice, near Srebrenica. The police are searching for several other people. These are the first arrests on the territory of Serbia over mass executions in Srebrenica and the vicinity. The Department for War Crimes Investigations arrested N.M., A.G., M.B., A. D., B.M., J.P., and D.P. by the order of the War Crimes Prosecution, on suspicion that they committed war crimes against the civilian population. The War Crimes Prosecution issued an order for conducting an investigation against former members of the “Jahorina” Training Center within the Republika Srpska Interior Ministry’s Special Brigade, under suspicion that they committed war crimes against civilians in Srebrenica, the site of Kravica. “It is important to stress that this is the first time that the War Crimes Prosecution deals with mass murders of civilians and war prisoners in Srebrenica,” said Deputy Prosecutor for War Crimes Bruno Vekaric. He says that Serbia is approaching the key moment in facing the past. “We have never dealt with a crime of such proportions. It is very important that Serbia takes a clear stand towards Srebrenica through a court process,” said Vekaric. There are more than 1,000 Muslim civilians among the victims, whose mortal remains had been identified in mass graves at several locations, including Glogova 1 and 2 and Ravnice. The Prosecution and Interior Ministry are searching for several other persons assumed to be in the neighboring countries.

Vekaric confirmed for Tanjug that the eighth suspect for war crime against civilians has been arrested.

Weak for the most difficult constitutional dispute (Politika, by Slobodan Orlovic, associate professor at the Novi Sad Law Faculty)

I had hoped that, after the constitutional-legal non-process related to the Brussels agreement – because the topic is very important – a handful of newspaper articles and commentaries would follow. But this turned out to be ungrounded, so far. Only very few texts on this topic, that is current not only now, but will be as long as the Brussels agreement is being “implemented”. The Constitutional Court waived its right to arbitrate in this, so far, most important national dispute. By declaring itself (Conclusion in the “Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia” of 2 February 2015) incompetent for the constitutional-legal assessment of this agreement, it revealed that, in fact, it should not have been on the path of EU integration. Even at the cost of violating the Constitution. For the sake of higher goals.

In its rationale, the Constitutional court still didn’t miss to explain to us, systematically, but in a confusing way, why it didn’t declare this agreement unconstitutional. From the abundance of words and stands I set aside the simplest. It was stated: the Brussels agreement is not an international agreement, and it is neither a ratified agreement nor is it included in the Serbian legal system. Further, this agreement is not a legal document at all, nor individual, let alone a general, thus it has no application in the legal system. The Constitutional Court considers, among other things, that the Brussels agreement as the government Conclusion (of 22.4.2013) is “guidance in conducting policy”, or as a parliamentary decision on accepting a Report… (of 26.4.2013), it is a certain political document, passed in the sphere of conducting a policy, without a generally binding legal character.

Thus, the agreement survived at the account of the Constitution and constitutionality, contrary to the stand for public debate of invited professors of the constitutional law (R. Markovic, V. Petrov, T. Marinkovic). And with one vote against of the four constitutional judges (K. Manojlovic Andric, D. Stojanovic, O. Vucic, B. Nenadic – three of the latter also professors of constitutional law).

Is it worthwhile to complain, what do we do? When the prime minister’s initial on the Brussels agreement (2013) perpetuated the authorities’ intention for Serbia to detach the province of Kosovo and Metohija, there was still smoldering hope. It was known that this agreement would eventually come under attack of the Constitution and the protector of the Constitutional Court. Of these two, as we assure students, there is no greater power in the constitutional law and entire legal system. But this attack of law was completely absent. That means that, in such a terminated constitutional dispute, there is no longer a legal remedy. This merely procedural decision, on the most difficult constitutional-legal issue in the past history of the Constitutional Court, is, at the same time, the end of the fama that the Constitutional Court always defends its Constitution in the Serbian constitutional law. When it is most difficult, it neither wants (it doesn’t embark on trials) nor can (listens to the signal of authorities) nor knows (in the Conclusion states as its own the findings of “government” experts).

Is there at least a legal remedy for the non-constitutional Brussels agreement? Government political documents could be remedies according to the Constitution, while harmful for this agreement. In the political field, the government can give up from all agreements, including the Brussels one. At what cost? I guess at great cost, because the followers of the agreement would probably defend the reality, life – it’s not as if some constitution and some constitutional court can disrupt our European path paved with this first and subsequent Brussels agreements. Even if Kosovo has to go, even if other things follow, we must reach Europe. Yet, we must know that degrading the constitution, as a state symbol, is equal to negating a state. This further makes the legal system an anti-system, a set of regulations without order. Where some agreement with a non-recognized territory trumps the constitution – then some law and decree can also do the same.

REGIONAL PRESS

B&H Prosecution congratulates Serbian Prosecution (Srna)

The B&H Prosecution sent the expressions of support and congratulations to prosecutors of the War Crimes Prosecution and police in Serbia “over the successful and professionally realized action of the arrest of seven persons suspected of committing war crimes in Srebrenica”. “The arrest action was a direct result of cooperation of the two prosecutions and chief prosecutors within which they exchanged information, and evidence on the suspects who are in Serbia and have Serbian citizenship,” reads the statement of the B&H Prosecution. It further states that “during the arrest action, the chief prosecutors Goran Salihovic and Vladimir Vukcevic had been in constant contact and coordination”. The B&H Prosecution recalls that the B&H and Serbian Prosecutions achieved good cooperation in exchanging information based on the Protocol on Cooperation of the two countries. Several suspects for this crime were processed earlier in the B&H Prosecution’s cases, and the investigation against some of them is still underway. The representatives of the families of the victims of war crimes had given consent to the Serbian judiciary to process these suspects “which represents a clear sign of trust and cooperation”, states the B&H Prosecution. It further states that “cooperation of the two prosecutions continues in the direction of processing other perpetrators of these and other war crimes”.

Brammertz: Arrests confirmation of regional cooperation (Srna)

The Hague Tribunal Chief Prosecutor Serge Brammertz has stated that the arrest of eight individuals in Serbia, who are suspected of having committed a war crime in the territory of Srebrenica, comes as a result of regional cooperation. This is a very positive course of developments and a confirmation that the regional cooperation between prosecutor’s offices is improving in terms of arrest and persecution of war crime suspects, Brammertz told reporters in Banja Luka. He noted that ICTY provided certain pieces of information concerning the case but will not be in charge of its closing. This is a case in the power of colleagues from B&H and Belgrade, and the local judiciary will be in charge of it, he said. Within his working visit to B&H, Brammertz conferred with representatives of NGOs from the Republika Srpska that gather Serb victims from the past war.

Agreement on the joint ministries (Fena)

Deputy President of the Party of Democratic Action (SDA) Bakir Izetbegovic stated that the Federation Ministry of Finance will be joint (SDA, HDZ and DF) and that Ministry of Veterans’ Affairs will also be joint, but only between DF and SDA. Based on that, SDA will have a prime minister and five ministries, DF will have five ministries including the joint ministry, HDZ will have five ministries including the joint ministry, said Izetbegovic.

Brammertz: Finalize transfer of subjects of war crimes from state to cantonal level (Fena)

The Hague Tribunal Chief Prosecutor Serge Brammertz visited the Prosecutor’s Office of the Federation of B&H where he met Zdravko Knezevic, the Chief Federal Prosecutor. During the meeting, attended by Brammertz’s associates and the ICTY Mission Chief in B&H Margareth Prinse, current problems of prosecuting war crimes cases at the entity level were discussed.

They agreed that it is necessary to finalize transfer of subjects of war crimes from country to canton level as soon as possible in order to get final number of subject to be processed on this level. Brammertz showed interest in educating judges, prosecutors and additional staff working on subjects of war crimes.

INTERNATIONAL PRESS

Suspected jihadist recruiters on trial in Serbia, Albania (Zee News, 18 March 2015)

Belgrade: Fifteen men went on trial in Serbia and Albania on Tuesday accused of recruiting and financing volunteers to go to Syria to fight with jihadist groups. The trials underline how countries in the Balkans have increased their efforts to prevent the recruitment of jihadists following reports that hundreds of people from the region have been fighting with the Islamic State group in Syria and Iraq. In Serbia`s first such trial, two of the five defendants pleaded not guilty on Tuesday to terrorism charges for recruiting and providing financial support to volunteers to go to Syria. Nine people went on trial in Albania for charges of “inciting and recruiting” more than 70 jihadists and helping them travel to Syria. One of the defendants in Serbia, Izudi Crnovrsanin, refuted the charges. “I did not recruit anybody to go to Syria, I know nothing about any money,” he told the court, according to Beta news agency. But he admitted: “I have always wanted to live in an Islamic state where sharia is respected.” Crnovrsanin and four other men were charged a year ago with “joining forces to finance terrorism, train and recruit people for terrorist acts.” Two of the defendants are still at large and are being tried in absentia alongside the three others. Another defendant also pleaded not guilty to the charges, while the third is expected to enter his plea on Wednesday. According to the prosecutor, the five are suspected of having “organised and financed the departure of Serbian citizens as well as people from other countries to camps for terrorist training in Syria and later to conflict zones.” One of the accused allegedly helped jihadists to travel from Istanbul to training camps in Syria, while another is suspected of helping them obtain training in the Syrian town of Azaz. They face up to 10 years imprisonment if found guilty of the terrorism charges. The Serbian government supports the US-led fight against Islamic State. Members of Serbia`s Muslim community, mostly living in the southeastern region of Sandzak, are generally moderate, but some have adopted doctrines inspired by the strict Saudi brand of Islam called Wahhabism. In a bid to fight the growing threat of radical Islam, Serbia amended its criminal law, making it punishable under law to join jihadist combat abroad. A court in the Albanian capital Tirana heard that volunteers were recruited during prayers at mosques. Two of the nine defendants are self-proclaimed imams. Eight of the men on trial have refused to be defended by a lawyer, saying that “only Allah is our lawyer”.

Serbia arrests seven men over 1995 Srebrenica massacre (AP, 18 March 2015)

Balkan country makes first arrests over slaughter of more than 1,000 Muslims in what was Europe’s worst civilian slaughter since second world war

Serbia has made its first arrests of people suspected of carrying out killings in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, Europe’s worst civilian slaughter since the second world war.

Serbian police arrested seven men accused of taking part in the slaughter of more than 1,000 Muslims at a warehouse on the outskirts of Srebrenica, a joint team of Serbian and Bosnian prosecutors told the Associated Press. Altogether, more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslims were killed by Serbs in the eastern Bosnian enclave in 1995 — the only atrocity in Europe since the second world war to be labelled genocide by the United Nations. The prosecutors said they were searching for more suspects in Serbia and in neighbouring countries. Serbia in the past has put on trial men who took a group of prisoners away from Srebrenica to be killed. And in 2011 it arrested Ratko Mladić – the warlord who masterminded the slaughter – and sent him to an international criminal court in The Hague, Netherlands. However, Wednesday’s arrests are Serbia’s first attempt to bring to justice men involved in the massacre. “It is important to stress that this is the first time that our prosecutor’s office is dealing with the mass killings of civilians and war prisoners in Srebrenica,” Bruno Vekarić, the lead Serb prosecutor in the case, told AP. He said Serbia was approaching a key moment in confronting its past. “We have never dealt with a crime of such proportions,” said Vekarić, Serbia’s deputy war crimes prosecutor. “It is very important for Serbia to take a clear position toward Srebrenica through a court process.” The biggest arrest in the sweep was Nedeljko Milidragović, the commander dubbed “Nedjo the Butcher”, who went on to become a successful businessman in Serbia, AP has learned. The collaboration by prosecutors from former wartime enemies Serbia and Bosnia — supported by the UN war crimes tribunal – is the most important case of judicial teamwork helping to heal the festering wounds of the war. The arrests follow a December sweep by the same team of prosecutors of 15 suspects in a separate wartime atrocity: a massacre that followed an abduction from a Bosnian train. Many Serbs still regard as heroes their wartime leaders – including Mladić and the Bosnian Serb president Radovan Karadžić, who are on trial at the UN war crimes tribunal – and believe they were victims of an elaborate western plot. That makes the current campaign to detain them deeply sensitive. Serbia’s conservative government is allowing the prosecutions to move forward in part because it is eager to join the European Union.

EU Is One Step Behind Developments in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Euinside, by Adelina Marini, 17 March 2015)

After long years of a standstill, at first sight, it seems that the process of European integration of Bosnia and Herzegovina is starting to come off from the deadlock. This became possible after Croatia launched an initiative last year for a stronger commitment by the EU for the European integration of BiH in response to the social unrest there in the beginning of last year. The Croatian initiative was accepted coldly in the beginning because, at the time, a much more immediate issue was Ukraine, but later it realised the seriousness of the possibility an old conflict to be reinfected in the Balkans. In the end of last year, Britain and Germany came up with an initiative of their own which was quickly approved by the Council of EU minsters and by the European Council. The condition was the political leaders in BiH to sign a written commitment that the European integration of their country will be their major priority. In exchange, the EU promised to unfreeze the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA). The written commitment was signed by the political leaders on 29 January and was approved by the parliament of BiH on 23 February during the visit of EU’s High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy Federica Mogherini in Sarajevo. With this commitment the institutions at all government levels in the, may be, most complicated state in the world commit themselves to implement all the necessary reforms for BiH’s progress toward full fledged EU accession. They also commit to establish an efficient mechanism for coordination between the institutions on EU affairs – something the EU has insisted for many years on. However, in the written commitment there is no specific deadline. It is written: “as soon as possible”. Among the reforms are economic and social measures in the framework of the Compact for Growth and Jobs adopted for BiH last year; creating a functioning market economy; introducing rule of law, fight against corruption and organised crime; acceleration of the reconciliation process; strengthening the administration. And the EU was not late with the answer by adopting during the foreign ministers meeting on 16 March in Brussels the unfreezing of the SAA. It was signed on 16 June 2008 and its ratification by all EU member states was finished in February 2011. The agreement, though, never entered into force because BiH was expected to apply the ruling of the European Court for Human Rights on the Sejdic-Finci case. It is this case that has held the EU door closed for BiH. It demanded from the country to amend its Constitution to allow people from ethnic groups other than those listed in the Constitution (Croats, Serbs, Bosniaks) to participate in the governing of the country. In its written commitment BiH puts the application of the ruling on the back seat. “The institutions of government in Bosnia and Herzegovina will, at a later stage (consequent to the initial reform measures), make progress regarding implementation of additional reforms in order to improve the functionality and efficiency of all levels of government in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and direct special attention to the implementation of the ruling of the European Court for Human Rights in the case of Sejdic and Finci vs. Bosnia and Herzegovina”, says the commitment. More than a year after the EU committed seriously to unfreezing the European integration process of BiH it is clear that its actions are belated. The reason is that while the process of conclusion of the written agreement was taking place, in neighbouring Croatia the presidential elections were won by Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic, the candidate of the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), which has a sister party in BiH led by Dragan Covic. In her election campaign and after taking office Ms Grabar-Kitarovic many times urged for a new international conference on the establishment of a third entity in BiH. Currently, they are only two: Republika Srpska and the Bosnia and Herzegovina federation. HDZ, however, insists on the separation of the Croats from the federation into a third entity. The leader of the Croatian HDZ Tomislav Karamarko recently provoked severe reactions in BiH by sending a letter to the Bosnian Croatian parliament in the country supporting their demand for a renegotiation of the Dayton peace agreement. On 1 March, the Croatian people’s parliament in Mostar voted a detailed declaration [in Croatian] in which it is pointed out that the construction of BiH after Dayton has not satisfied the demands of the Croatian people. According to the Bosnian Croats, the Dayton construction has “legalised the injustice caused by the military annexations and banishing of people”. They also believe that the territorial organisation and the construction of the state is irrational, nonfunctional and ungovernable. The declaration insists on a radical constitutional change to include new territorial organisation and equalisation of the rights of the three peoples in the country. The Bosnian Croatian MPs are aware that this would be really hard to achieve which is why they call, if no consensus is reached for such a deep constitutional change inside the country, to seek a solution through an international conference. “Given that we received the current Constitution at an international conference as part of the peace agreement and with the guarantee of the UN Security Council, we believe that if there is no internal consensus the most logical thing is BiH to receive a new constitution at a new international conference on BiH. A Constitution that will establish a symmetric for the three constitutional peoples federal state”, the declaration reads. And although it was voted only two weeks ago, the issue was not discussed during the EU foreign ministers meeting whose focus was Africa, a new migration strategy, Ukraine. Federica Mogherini hoped that the activation of the SAA will “keep the energy and the momentum that I found in Sarajevo last time on the reform process to get closer to the European Union”. According to the Croatian Foreign Minister Vesna Pusic, the path ahead of BiH is clear – fulfilling the SAA conditions which are a preparation for the real accession negotiations. Progress will depend on how the country is implementing them. This could take 3, 6 or even 10 years. And may be more, she said, emphasising that from the very beginning no one insisted on different criteria and preferences for any country aspiring for EU membership. Bulgaria’s Foreign Minister Daniel Mitov told this website that at the moment many ideas are circulating but first all of them need to be reviewed and only then it will be decided which is the best approach in this case. The EU’s actions so far reveal the Union’s striving to try and avoid a renegotiation of Dayton. There is a real danger, however, the process of European integration to again freeze because of the lack of consensus within BiH.

Refugees in Montenegro Plan Return to Kosovo (BIRN, by Dusica Tomovic, 17 March 2015)

Hundreds of refugees who fled Kosovo during the late 1990s and are now living in Montenegro say they are ready to go home if the authorities in both countries assist them

Podgorica The head of the Montenegro’s Directorate for Refugees, Zeljko Sofranac, said on Monday that at least 700 people from Kosovo, mostly from the Pec/Peja area, are ready to go back. Sofranac said that the Montenegrin and Kosovo governments were also to provide financial support to the returnees in terms of help with buying land in the Pec/Peja area. He was speaking after meeting the mayor of Pec/Peja, Gazmend Muhadzeri, to discuss the possibilities for the return of internally displaced persons. “We have received assurances from Pec’s local authorities that they are more than willing to allocate seven plots of land to build houses in the area to which ten refugee families already returned in 2014,” Sofranac said. Muhadzeri said the Pec/Peja municipality was willing to accommodate all those who wish to return. “For those who do not have land, the local authorities will offer support,” he promised. According to government data, around 11,000 refugees from Kosovo have the temporary status of internally displaced people in Montenegro. Over 3,000 are Roma living in a rundown refugee camp near Podgorica. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, a Council of Europe human rights body, recently urged the closure of the camp as soon as possible. In May 2011, the two governments agreed to aid the voluntary return to Kosovo of refugees now residing in Montenegro. The process began in 2013 when 14 families, a total of 64 people, returned to Kosovo aided by a programme that provided a house, grants to start a business, furniture and firewood.

Brain drain in the Western Balkans (Open Democracy, by Bilsana Bibic, 17 March 2015)

“It seems to me that you mostly export young people. You should find a way to keep them and export other goods more,” stated the US ambassador to Serbia, Michael Kirby, while speaking at the Kopaonik Business Forum 2015 earlier this month. Ambassador Kirby’s statement is clear-cut and sobering, all the more so because it was delivered by a foreign diplomat rather than a Serbian official. The latter and their counterparts across the region would do well to pay attention. In the context of high unemployment rates and migratory trends towards the EU, brain drain in the Western Balkans remains an urgent issue. A cursory look at the statistics shows poor prospects for the region’s youth. ILO WESO Trends for 2015 and supporting data sets predict a youth unemployment rate of 38.8% for Montenegro and 47.5% for Serbia, while KHDR notes a 55.3% rate for Kosovo in 2012. Only in January 2015, 10,000 Kosovars applied for asylum in Hungary. Figures for Serbia also show an alarming trend, with large numbers of highly skilled professionals leaving the country every year. EU member states, as the first port of call for these individuals, are another major stakeholder, especially considering that Croatia is already a member state the other countries are either potential candidates or have a candidate status. The causes of brain drain in the region are diverse and numerous. The 2014 IMF Working Paper notes weak performance of the labour market which results in high unemployment rates and societal transformations in the process of transition and EU integration. However, these are just the tip of the iceberg. The more concerning trend, noted in recent research of the Council of Europe (final version to be available in April 2015) is politicization of youth and the resulting decline in their political engagement. Active participation in political parties as a way of securing a job, problems of nepotism and promotion on basis of non-professional criteria are taken for granted in the region. These conditions, though disturbing, nevertheless underline corruption and other internal causes of the phenomenon of brain drain. In relation to youth, they are a necessary evil for those who stay and an additional reason to leave for those who have the option to do so. However, not all youth leaves for these reasons. Some simply desire professional development, a larger academic network and the experience of studying and working abroad. These factors, together with the desire for a decent job are emphasized in the RRPP documentary relating to the status and conditions of young researches in the Balkans. RRPP’s policy and briefs produced within the National Policy Dialogues offer other useful pointers of the causes of brain drain. Inadequacy of higher education institutions is one of them. HEI in the region share low professional mobility, inadequate funding of scientific activities and underdeveloped research capacities in relation to methodology, data processing and use of foreign languages. If we add onto this the issues surrounding plagiarism, lack of regional cooperation and a gap between the teaching and the research process we paint a more complete picture of reasons which lead young researchers abroad. However, we must be careful of over-simplification. Even though the region shares many characteristics, each country has additional issues of its own, specific to its social, political and cultural environment. For example, Kosovo’s University of Pristina deals with a lack of human capacity to apply for international funds, small exposure to international cooperation and a lack of inter-institutional cooperation (Kosovo Policy Brief). Thus, when proposing solutions, we must apply a country-specific approach. Each country in the Western Balkans, indeed, has various mechanisms which deal with the question of brain drain. In terms of legislation, Montenegro has an expired National Youth Action Plan, expecting renewal since 2011, Strategy of Cooperation with Diaspora 2011-2014, an Action Plan related to it and a Draft Law on the Cooperation of Montenegro with Diaspora from 2014. Serbia has an old National Youth Strategy and is currently working on drafting a new one, Law on Diaspora and Serbs in the Region from 2009, as well as a Strategy relating to Diaspora from 2011. Kosovo has a Youth Law, a Youth Strategy and an Action Plan relating to it, Law on Diaspora and a National Strategy on Diaspora and Migration for 2013-2018. All countries have a body designated to deal with diaspora related issues. Just like legislative mechanisms, projects and activities related to their implementation abound. However, their numbers do not indicate success in addressing the problem of brain drain in practice. As the data on youth unemployment, brain drain and wider migratory trends show – the Western Balkans need quality rather than quantity of mechanisms. Thus, even though there are positive examples in the region, there is still a large discrepancy between theory and practice. An example of positive developments addressing the issue of bureaucracy in relation to recognition of qualifications is a creation of an ENIC/NARIC center in Serbia. On the other hand, Directorate for Diaspora’s project on a database of students and researchers who have returned to Montenegro in cooperation with OMSA addresses the lack of reliable data on brain drain in the region. A major area still awaiting change is the attitude towards brain drain. Most regional actors and mass media representatives continue to understand the issue within the traditional brain drain/brain gain models. They focus on the socio-economic causes of brain drain and its negative effects, seeking solutions that will bring back and permanently keep highly skilled professionals. In doing so, they fail to acknowledge the importance of mobility for individuals and potential for positive impact of brain drain. An alternative approach, the brain circulation model, is more flexible and better aligned with the complex migratory trends of highly skilled populations. It acknowledges positive impact of brain drain (skills and experiences of returnees, worker remittances from expatriates, the value of transfer and exchange of knowledge and technology). It also allows for flexibility in understanding mobility as a personal choice and seeks to create knowledge networks of professionals in the country and abroad rather than re-locate them to their country of origin. Even though brain circulation model has been present among the experts on the issue for more than a decade, it is only starting to take root in the Western Balkans. As a consequence, there is still a discrepancy between the way brain drain is understood among various national and international actors (youth, mass media, government and non-government bodies and international organizations). A positive example of a shift in attitude is Kosovo’s Brain Gain Fund. The project was launched in 2010 with the aim to bring back senior researchers and re-locate them permanently in Kosovo. After failing to spark any interest, the ministry in charge of its management changed its focus on provision of funds for top professors to spend their sabbatical years in Kosovo. The Montenegrin Directorate for Diaspora demonstrates a similar shift in attitude in acknowledging the need for the brain drain question to be considered in a new manner and in focusing its efforts on developing knowledge networks. A strong advocate of transforming the idea of brain drain into a brain network, which emphasizes the role of NGOs and other actors in this issue, is OMSA and its director Aleksandar Jacimovic. There is a need for a coordinated action of all involved stakeholders on all of the issues explored in this article. An area where a regional approach might be especially helpful is creation of a reliable database on the issue of brain drain since a lack of data remains a challenge for the region. On the other hand, the need to work on creating quality mechanisms rather than increasing their quantity, while a region-wide issue, might be better addressed through a country-specific approach. While efforts on overcoming bureaucratic impediments and establishing contacts with Diaspora networks exist, those relating to provision of incentives in form of short-term positive discrimination in employment, tax and housing areas, or contractual agreements to return by scholarship sponsors are generally lacking. In addition to these new issues, the old underlying causes of brain drain, such as the weak performance of the labor market, corruption, politicization and the lack of trust in the educational system likewise need addressing. A good start might be reform of higher education systems, especially relating to the lack of emphasis on research and financing of HEI. Finally, and most importantly, there is a need for a new approach towards brain drain in the region. It is necessary to bridge the existing gap in attitudes and perceptions and shift the long-term brain drain policies towards the model of brain circulation. In doing so, however, we must not forget that mobility in the Western Balkans still remains a privilege and a necessity caused by the socio-economic environment rather than simply a personal choice. As ambassador Kirby noted, we must continue working on keeping, rather than exporting our youth, even while creating knowledge networks and implementing the brain circulation model.