LOCAL PRESS

Djuric: We do not accept Pristina’s game (Tanjug)

Belgrade does not accept Pristina’s game, because the Kosovo Constitutional Court has no say regarding the agreement on the Community of Serb Municipalities (ZSO) signed by Belgrade and Pristina in Brussels, and Pristina needs to implement this agreement, the Head of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija Marko Djuric stated today. “We will not sit idle and nervously wait what this constitutional court will state. We are not interested at all. We have a harmonized and signed agreement, we have deadlines, so please, gentlemen, implement what was agreed,” Djuric told Tanjug on the occasion of the statement by Edita Tahiri, Kosovo minister in charge of the dialogue with Belgrade, that if the Constitutional Court of Kosovo finds the agreement on the ZSO contravening with the constitution, the agreement will be again a topic in the dialogue.

Djuric said it is clear that Pristina does not intend to create conditions for the formation of the ZSO within the period specified in Brussels. Djuric says that it is common truth that the ZSO is our main motive for taking part in the Brussels dialogue, and the main motive for the Kosovo Serbs for taking part in the political life and this is why Belgrade doesn’t accept Pristina’s game.

EU motherly relationship towards Pristina (Politika)

If, by chance, the Serbian Constitutional Court would determine that the agreement on the ZSO is in discord with the constitution, would Ulrike Lunacek peacefully conclude that they it is necessary to change the agreed in Brussels? This is precisely what the Chairman of the European Parliament (EP) and the Rapporteur for Kosovo requested by commenting the decision of the Kosovo Constitutional Court to suspend the implementation of the agreement on the ZSO unitl a final assessment on whether it is in accordance with the Kosovo Constitution. She said that the move by the court is not an unfriendly act towards Serbia, yet it is precisely how Belgrade sees this postponement of the implementation of the agreement, in which it invested all of its political credibility. Lunacek, as the member of the EP, doesn’t need to be concerned and restrained like some Brussels bureaucrats, just as she hasn’t been in the past, unreservedly supporting Kosovo’s independence. Ulrike Lunacek is much more inclined to Pristina than any other EP rapporteur for Serbia had ever been towards Belgrade, especially once Jelko Kacin. The two of them symbolize the EU double standards in this region. For the sake of truth, Kacin’s successor, the current EP rapporteur for Serbia David McAllister, is seen here as a much more objective interpreter of the situation in Serbia. However, a source familiar with the situation in the EP says that Lunacek’s stands are “more pro-Kosovo than anti-Serb since she wants to strengthen the Kosovo state as the civil state of Serbs and Albanians”. This source points out that she is, nevertheless, expected, as a member of the EP who may freely present stands, to have a balanced stand from the post of the EP vice president and rapporteur for Kosovo. This source also reveals that she stands behind the proposal for the dialing code for Kosovo to go through Austria. Among this year’s numerous messages of support and understanding to Pristina is the commitment for a visa-free regime for Kosovo. She also lobbied for Kosovo’s UNESCO membership, and once requested that Belgrade receives Thaqi as it received Tony Blaire. She didn’t miss opportunities to invite five EU member states that didn’t recognize Kosovo to do so.

SNP: To freeze participation in Brussels agreement (RTV/Tanjug)

The decision of the “Constitutional Court” of the false state of Kosovo to suspend the formation of the ZSO, as well as the “thunderous silence” coming from the European Commission and the European Parliament in regard to these political provocations of Pristina – represents one more reason over the which the Serbian People’s Party (SNP) requests again an urgent freezing of the Brussels negotiations and the opening of a serious debate on the further resumption of Serbia’s EU integration. That debate would have to end in a referendum where Serbian citizens would state whether they are for or against EU membership at the price of recognizing the independence of the false state of Kosovo. It turned out that the SNP’s fear that the only goal of the “Brussels agreement”, from the point of view of those who had created it, is the abolishment of the presence of the state of Serbia on the territory of the southern province, was justified, while everything that was supposed to represent a symbolic gain for Serbia, and this is the formation of the ZSO, and through it, the protection of the rights of Kosovo Serbs, is not being implemented, nor will be implemented. It is clear to the entire Serbian and international public that such unilateral decisions of the false state of Kosovo, with the EU support, is revenge to Serbia because it prevented, with the help if its real friends throughout the world, Kosovo’s UNESCO membership, in spite of the lobbying of the majority of EU members. We remind that not long after the decision on the suspension of the ZSO, the false state of Kosovo ratified the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) with the EU, which was also supported by the Serb List MPs, to the shame of their ancestors and descendants, with their votes in the assembly of the false state of Kosovo. By voting for the ratification of the SAA between the EU and the false state of Kosovo, the just inaugurated head of the Serb List Slavko Simic actually recognized the occupied Kosovo as an independent state and gave legitimacy to Hashim Thaqi and Isa Mustafa on their “EU path”. Because they supported with their votes the agreement that deeply contravenes the Constitution and interests of the Republic of Serbia and the Serb nation, MPs of the Serb List will eventually been prosecuted for the crime of high treason.

Vucic treated “Kosovo” as an independent state in a TV show (New Serbian Political Thought)

“Small countries such as Montenegro and Kosovo can say that they have large growth,” Prime Minister Vucic told a show on TV Happy. Justifying Serbia’s economic stagnation and an extremely low economic growth in relation to other states, he said that it is easy for “small countries such as Montenegro and Kosovo” to have large growth. By signing the “Brussels agreement”, Vucic’s government has de facto recognized “Kosovo” and ceded four Serb municipalities in the north, and obviously wishes to, with the latest rhetoric, “change the minds” of the people in the direction of reconciling with Kosovo’s independence.

REGIONAL PRESS

Nikolic receives invitation to visit B&H next March (Nezavisne/Dnevnik)

B&H Presidency member Bakir Izetbegovic has invited Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic to pay an official visit to Sarajevo in March next year, the presidential press office said in a statement on Thursday. In a telephone conversation, Izetbegovic extended to Nikolic a coordinated invitation of the B&H Presidency, which is comprised of Bosniak, Serb and Croat representatives, the statement said. Nikolic has said in the past that he will always pay a visit to B&H with the aim of preserving peace, stability and cooperation in the region if there is a unanimous position and consent of all three members of the B&H Presidency. Given the fact that Izetbegovic practical canceled Nikolic’s visit this year, after the arrest of Naser Oric, both have agreed that it would be most appropriate for Nikolic to come to Sarajevo when Izetbegovic becomes president.

After donations to Srebrenica: When will Serbia return multimillion debt to B&H municipalities? (Klix.ba)

Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic announced in Srebrenica that his country will donate 5 million Euros to this municipality. However, there is still no indication of when the issue of compensation that Serbia owes to B&H municipalities for flooded land could be solved. Camil Durakovic, the Mayor of Srebrenica, said that yesterday’s donation is a modest gift to Srebrenica and that it has nothing to do with the flooded land. “The issue of payment of the debt for the flooded land is a separate subject that will be resolved bilaterally between the two countries, at the level of B&H and Serbia. It is primarily a legal issue,” said Durakovic. He noted that donation is not reparation for genocide but a gift which is marking the beginning of a new future, as well as the cooperation between Bosniaks and Serbs. Until 1992, Serbia was regularly paying compensation for flooded land of reservoirs “Perucac” to the Municipality of Srebrenica. Today, however, there is no precise data regarding how much Serbia owes to Srebrenica on behalf of these fees. The municipal authorities of Srebrenica earlier calculated that Serbia owes 15 million euros, based on the amount of money that Serbia pays for the same purposes to the Serbian municipality of Bajina Basta. However, Srebrenica is not the only one not to receive payment of these fees. The mayor of Zvornik Zoran Stevanovic also counted that Serbia’s debt to that municipality is also somewhere between 12.5 and 15 million euro. Bratunac, Rogatica and Visegrad are counting on the same fee from Serbia as well. At a joint session of the government of Serbia and the Council of Ministers of B&H it was agreed to form an intergovernmental expert commission that will make concrete action plan to solve this problem in cooperation with the entities. Meanwhile, while we wait for the commission, not only that Serbia does not pay the debt, but it is also not paying for the current obligations on the same basis. Only in 2015, Serbia was supposed to pay about 3 million euros to B&H municipalities.

Ustasha ideology in Croatia not defeated (Srna)

A scale model of Ustasha insignia, submitted for a competition for the conceptual design of the Memorial Centre in Donja Gradina, is a major provocation and insult to the victims of the Jasenovac concentration camp, Milojko Budimir, a member of the Jasenovac Committee of the Serbian Orthodox Church Holy Synod of Bishops, told Srna. “This has especially come to light during the recently held parliamentary election in Croatia, where parties received votes according to the amount of hatred against the Serbs. Apart from them, there also appeared the parties that openly advocated the Ustasha ideology and some of them even had their representatives in the Croatian Parliament voted for,” said Budimir. All this points to the need to build the Memorial Centre in Donja Gradina, he said. “Unfortunately, the Serbs have only a few such centers that preserve the memory of and honor the innocent Serb victims,” he said. Budimir recalled that the Jasenovac Committee held a meeting in Jasenovac on September 12/13, discussing, among other things, the competition for the conceptual design of the Memorial Centre in Donja Gradina. “The conclusion once again was that the goal of building such a memorial was to pay respects to the victims of Camp Jasenovac. What exists there now, and what is supposed to testify to the crimes, is more a cover-up than it is a contribution to learning the whole truth. The existing exhibition in Jasenovac falsely minimizes the number of victims and the genocide committed against the Serbs, he emphasized. “There is no mention of Ustasha leaders, no show of weapons used to kill the victims, no evidence of the role of the Roman Catholic Church in the whole thing,” concluded Budimir. Apart from the museum, Budimir said, there is also a green field with a stone flower, which seems to the ill-informed as a grass golf terrain, not an execution site where several hundred thousand Serbs, Jews, Roma and other antifascists were killed in the most horrific ways. “In 1991, the Croatian Democratic Party HDZ formed a committee in Croatia which arrived at the conclusion ‘after a painstaking and lengthy work’ that 2,238 people had been killed in Camp Jasenovac and that the camp had been ‘justified because it incarcerated the opponents of the Independent State of Croatia (NDH),’” recalled Budimir, who also chairs the Association of Refugee and Similar Associations of Serbs from Croatia, headquartered in Belgrade. According to the findings of Euroblic, a model of the Ustasha letter “U” with a curved knife and hammer was delivered by mail as an “application” for the open competition for the conceptual design of the Memorial Centre in the Donja Gradina Memorial Area. The application was delivered by mail and contained the inscription “For competition to win” and “Do not open until the train stops” and arrived in the Ministry of Education and Culture of Republika Srpska a day after the official deadline for the international competition published this summer had expired. The incident has been reported to the police and is investigated by the Banja Luka District Prosecutor’s Office.

Dramatic events on Croatian post-election political scene (Nova TV/Hina)

Drago Prgomet, who was expelled from the National Council of the Bridge coalition of independent slates on Friday for meeting privately with Croatian Prime Minister Zoran Milanovic, said that there was nothing secret about that meeting and that there was no talk of the distribution of ministerial posts at the meeting. “This is a free country, my friends were killed in the war so that people in this country could talk with whomever they like, including me with my friend, (Defense) Minister (Ante) Kotromanovic,” Prgomet said, adding that he knew that Milanovic would attend the meeting but that ministerial posts were not discussed. “We discussed how to overcome the current crisis, how to try and agree a broad coalition government, namely everything we had discussed before that; there is nothing secret about it, if I had wanted to keep (the meeting) secret, I would not have gone to (Kotromanovic’s) apartment early in the evening,” said Prgomet. He said that he was also to have met with Zeljko Reiner of the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) today because Reiner contacted him two days ago. “(Bridge leader) Bozo Petrov knew about all of my communication, and he knew that I had communicated both with Milanovic and with Reiner, who repeated his invitation at (Bridge’s) meeting with the HDZ, there is nothing secret about it,” said Prgomet. In statements for Croatian Television and Nova TV, Prgomet said that he learned about his expulsion from Bridge on web portals, that no one had asked him to explain what happened at the meeting with Milanovic and that he still had not managed to reach Petrov. Asked if it was true that he told Milanovic that he could secure him ten seats, Prgomet said that he could not speak on anyone’s behalf and that that was not discussed at the meeting. Asked if he had told Bridge’s leadership that he would meet with Milanovic, Prgomet said that there was no Bridge leadership and that under the party’s statute, there was no National Council either. Bridge consists of independent people, there is a platform and an agreement in principle and I didn’t do anything to breach it, he said. Asked if it was true that he was willing to support Milanovic’s coalition, Prgomet said that he was only willing to support Petrov as the future prime minister. “Petrov will get my vote in the parliament.” He said that it was important to fulfill pre-election promises, make changes and assume responsibility. We cannot hide behind parliamentary benches and let someone else take the responsibility, it would kill any hope of change among voters, he said. Prgomet went on to say that a new election was not a way to change the situation in the country, “especially not now, when the economic situation is disastrous and Slovenia is putting a fence on Croatian territory and thousands of refugees are arriving.” Asked about his meeting with Kruno Badel, a special political advisor at the US Embassy, Prgomet said, “What better is there for Croatia than to speak about one’s homeland and show a wish to help, and who can be a better partner in that than our allies in NATO and the EU?”  Bridge leader Bozo Petrov said earlier that agreement had been reached by Bridge members to consult on all statements to be given by the coalition but that Prgomet acted on his own. Petrov said that this was proof that other political camps would try to cause disunity in Bridge, but that he believed that there would be no new departures from Bridge.

INTERNATIONAL PRESS

Kosovo: UNESCO rejection due to Serbia’s ‘appalling behaviour’ (EurActiv, by Daniel Tost, 13 November 2015)

Kosovo has just missed out on admission to UNESCO. In an interview by EurActiv Germany, Deputy Prime Minister Hashim Thaçi, was asked how he evaluated Belgrade’s role in the decision. Hashim Thaçi is the Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of Kosovo, who between 2008 and 2014 served as first Prime Minister after independence from Serbia was declared. He is the chairman of the Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK) and was the political leader of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), a paramilitary organisation which was active during the Kosovo War. EurActiv.de: Kosovo has just missed out on membership of the UN cultural organisation UNESCO on Monday (9 November). How serious a setback is this?

Hashim Thaçi: It is a regretful decision on the part of UNESCO, but it does not minimise the achievements of Kosovo as a state. As a nation, we have done all our homework and we were praised for the work that we have done. Yet, two-thirds of the votes proved to be an impasse for Kosovo this time. This will not discourage us from continuing to work intensively to consolidate the state of Kosovo internally and externally. We have just signed the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) with the EU. This is a recognition of Kosovo’s achievements in reforms at all levels of society as measured by a very strict and technical process, not influenced by politics. This should be a signal for the rest of the world, to recognise Kosovo’s achievements and to recognise the Kosovar state as a new and positive reality.

Is lobbying on the part of Serbia to blame?

Kosovo and, I believe, the EU, as well as the whole world, are appalled at the behaviour of Serbia. It was not only anti-lobbying but it was an anti-European campaign that goes contrary to all the achievements in the region in the last years. It was against the spirit of the dialogue and cooperation that we are promoting in Brussels through the dialogue process; it was against the spirit of normalisation of relations and building peace and stability. The language used by Serbia, unfortunately not only the politicians in Serbia, was one of war-mongering and at times bordering on racism. This is definitely a huge blow to all the efforts of the entire Western Balkans, the representatives of which are putting in enormous efforts to strengthen peace and stability. Nevertheless, when we look at the votes cast yesterday, we can easily say that Kosovo won more than Serbia. Kosovo secured the support of 92 UNESCO members with the right to vote, among them many countries that have not yet bilaterally-recognised Kosovo as a state. More importantly, the countries that led the support for Kosovo in UNESCO are the family of liberal democracies where Kosovo belongs and wants as its home. On the other hand, all Serbia achieved was denying all communities in Kosovo, including the Serb community, the right to benefit from membership in UNESCO, to be part of a project of building reconciliation and peace through collaboration in education, in science, in culture. One other thing that can be observed from the voting yesterday: we are living in a world that is increasingly divided along ideological lines. The voting yesterday was not against Kosovo. It was a vote against what Kosovo represents, a vote against the idea of human rights and freedoms prevailing over all other paradigms and ideologies.

Are the EU’s high representative Frederica Mogherini and Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn doing enough to act against Belgrade’s blockade policy in regional and international organisations towards Pristina?

Everyone believed that Serbia had turned over a new leaf and had disconnected with the policies of Milosevic, but the behaviour of Serbia in the last weeks in relations with Kosovo and the region have not gone unnoticed. On the other hand, Kosovo’s aspiration for UNESCO membership received widespread support, of all those who worked with Kosovo in whatever capacity. We were very encouraged with the outpouring of support and we are very thankful and grateful to all the friends and supporters among the international community who have openly and strongly supported our case. On the other hand, I am sure that we will have an opportunity to discuss with our partners about what does Serbia’s behaviour means for our joint efforts to build peace, stability, reconciliation and cooperation in the region.

Does the UNESCO rejection overshadow the conclusion of the EU Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the successful steps towards visa liberalisation?

The SAA and the positive evaluation of our efforts for visa liberalisation are achievements that cannot be overshadowed. We are grateful that the EU has found a way to enable the signing of the SAA with Kosovo, thus recognising the achievements of the nation in building democracy, rule of law and transforming the economy. Both processes, the signing of the SAA and positive evaluation of our efforts for visa liberalisation, are very technical and not influenced by politics. This is why these recognitions of our achievements are so important for us. They are highly appreciated also by the citizens of Kosovo, and we are sure that will only encourage us all, as a society, to continue along the path towards our only true home, the EU.

The EU Commission presented its progress reports on the candidate countries this Tuesday (10 November). There is strong criticism about the intensification of struggles of the Association of Serbian Municipalities in the Kosovar parliament. How can Kosovo’s government and opposition parties end these damaging conflicts?

We welcome the Progress Report, since it not only gives an evaluation of our work, but also serves as a roadmap for our work towards EU membership. We share the concern of the European Commission as well as our other international friends and supporters of Kosovo about the recent violence exercised by the opposition parties in the Kosovo Assembly. Not all political means have been exhausted to deliberate about all the issues that the opposition has raised. Therefore, we continue to call on the opposition parties to use the political means at their disposal to discuss any concerns they have. We have seen some changes of heart among the opposition parties and we believe that this is a sign that we can continue our political life unimpeded.

Fr. Sava: Time to Go Forward and Start Dialogue (BIRN, by Tim Judah, 13 November 2015)

Sava Janjic, the Abbot of Visoki Decani Monastery, says Serbian heritage needs to be settled within the Brussels dialogue before any further discussion on UNESCO status.

Q: Are you happy about winning at UNESCO or do you think you have just stalled the issue for a period of time?

A: This is not the time for jubilation or hard feelings. The UNESCO decision proved that such sensitive issues as cultural heritage in post-conflict areas need to be discussed by dialogue first. Despite disappointment on the Kosovo side, I believe that the right way forward is a discussion on the long-term institutional protection of Serbian heritage in the Brussels dialogue. As the Ahtisaari mechanisms are more or less lost from Kosovo’s legislation we need a clear and internationally guaranteed mechanism that would assure us that no matter who is running Kosovo, the international obligations of Kosovo prevent unilateral changes to legislation. Ahtisaari’s package on heritage was one of the most successful elements of the Ahtisaari plan and now the time is ripe to bring this issue to the table in Brussels. I don’t think that the dialogue will be stalled because the Brussels process is of essential importance for both Belgrade and Pristina to go forward towards EU integration. We remain open for dialogue and have called for it in the last months as the only way forward. Coinciding the UNESCO Kosovo campaign with a problematic draft law on cultural heritage triggered the reaction of our Church, which has been relatively reserved in going out to the press

Q: As you played a prominent role in the anti-campaign, are you worried about new attacks on Decani?

A: I don’t see my activity on social networks before the UNESCO decision as a political campaign. My intention was to draw attention to the problems we’ve been having with Kosovo authorities, particularly since April, when they tried to pass a highly discriminatory law on cultural heritage. In the context of that law, which requests all cultural heritage in Kosovo to become the property of the Republic of Kosovo, the UNESCO membership was seen by our Church as a tool of very likely cultural repression. The disappearance of the former Ahtisaari provisions from Kosovo legislation amid the process of historical revisionism, particularly in the Kosovo education system and writings of some Kosovo’s intellectuals, gave us a very clear indication that UNESCO status would lead to the deprivation of our identity, property rights and in short, our future in Kosovo. My social network activity was not politically motivated because we did not react to the admission of Kosovo to other organizations – it was purely provoked by the disregarding of our vital interests by the Kosovo government.

We are not afraid of new attacks because they would be highly harmful for Kosovo and would only confirm allegations that Kosovo is becoming an Islamist society and as such inacceptable for Europe. Protection of Christian Orthodox sites, particularly UNESCO World Heritage sites, is an important benchmark for Kosovo’s progress in future and any act of violence would be highly detrimental.

Q: Can you update us on the number of monks at the monastery?

A: We have 24 monks and novices. We also regularly have up to 15 workers/personnel help us in our daily activities (farming, taking care of premises and helping us receive guests.)

Q: What is the most important thing people outside should know in the wake of the UNESCO affair?

A: Our Church is not against the promotion of education, culture and science in Kosovo. We also did not want the issue of our heritage to enter into the arena of political confrontation. Our main request was to postpone the decision after the dialogue, and provide full internationally granted assurances to the Serbian Orthodox Church about the preservation of her most valuable heritage sites. We want to preserve our name and our tradition. These sites are not museums but living places of worship and imposing direct Kosovo government control over these sites creates a politically and emotionally charged situations like the recent dispute between Palestine and Israel over the square in front of the Wailing Wall, which created serious tensions and controversies.

In politically sensitive areas, UNESCO should act on the basis of fostering an atmosphere of dialogue and understanding for the sake of protecting heritage and avoid unnecessary political confrontations that can only damage this organization. We remain ready for dialogue with Kosovo but, due to problematic attempts to pass discriminatory legislation, we want the issue of heritage to be settled within the Brussels dialogue first. Kosovo’s nominal guarantees that it would keep to Ahtisaari’s principles are unfounded because the government has already deleted all references to the Ahtisaari plan from its legislation. At the same time, painful memories of the destruction of 150 churches and 400 cemeteries of our Church AFTER the war remains a dark cloud hovering over our heads. After the war in Bosnia and the Dayton peace deal, no mosques or churches were destroyed despite many more casualties and atrocities in the Bosnian war. What we consider the systematic destruction of our heritage by Kosovo Albanian extremists after the war, which was stopped only by KFOR, is a very problematic element in Kosovo’s recent history. Consequently, the Serbian Orthodox Church very much needs special status and protection amid a still quite intolerant atmosphere and recurrent provocations, minor attacks, and graffiti such as ISIL graffiti on Decani’s walls last year.

Q: What is your best guess about the current number of Serbs in Kosovo?

A: The number of Kosovo Serbs is approximately 130,000 according to our knowledge. The process of return has mostly stopped due to strong opposition in some Albanian majority municipalities, economic reasons and lack of security for isolated homes and families. Frequent attacks on returnees are additionally discouraging the return process. Most Serbs live south of the Ibar river and that was the reason why Serbiadoes not support partition which is also inadmissible to internationals butinsists on the Association of Serbian Municipalities, which would provide meaningful rights to Serb-majority municipalities in Kosovo and particularly ensure the normal functioning of the education system with Serbian curricula and a proper health protection. The Association was initially accepted by Kosovo in Brussels but is being systematically obstructed in parliament for weeks now despite strenuous international attempts to unblock the process and continue the Brussels dialogue which is essential for stability of Western Balkans.

Analysis: Mounting Security Risks Leave Bosnia Vulnerable (BIRN, 13 November 2015)

Bosnia’s security situation looks increasingly precarious as rising ethnic and political tensions mingle with economic and social hardship and global and regional turbulence

Two decades after the end of the 1992-5 war, Bosnia and Herzegovina is locked in a seemingly perpetual crisis as local politicians ignore growing internal and external challenges while using radical moves and inflammatory rhetoric in their power struggles. The political wrangling has weakened key government institutions at all levels and left the country more vulnerable to the growing internal tensions as well as to global terrorist threats and foreign influences from East and West. All these elements, together with Bosnia’s unresolved past and uncertain future, create a volatile environment that threatens to destabilize the security situation in the country and the region. “Bosnia is a key to stability for Balkans, not just because it lies between Serbia and Croatia, which is traditionally a route of Balkan conflicts, but from the historic fact that many conflicts started here,” former defence minister and former general Selmo Cikotic told BIRN. “We don’t have the fuel for another [armed] conflict but the tensions and instability caused primarily by politics are something that should be monitored,” he added. Other experts are more pessimistic. “Renewed inter-ethnic violence remains a real possibility,” reads Bosnia and Herzegovina Security Risk Analysis, Policy Note No 3, written by Kurt Bassuener and published by the Atlantic Initiative and Democratization Policy Council this October. The debate on whether a new conflict in Bosnia is possible and who could start it and how preoccupies locals, government officials as well as foreign diplomats and aid workers. This fact alone testifies to the degree to which security in Bosnia has eroded in recent years.