LOCAL PRESS

Brnabic: Lazarevic is a free man (Beta/Tanjug)

In a comment on the EU’s view that a decision to hire as a lecturer Vladimir Lazarevic, convicted by the Hague tribunal for war crimes committed in Kosovo, was contrary to European standards, Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic said she understood the problem the EU had pointed to, but that Lazarevic was a free man. “I do understand what they say, but I’d rather not open the Pandora’s Box of what’s going on in the region. This is just a drop in the sea,” Brnabic said to reporters in Belgrade. She said that Serbia was tolerant and flexible, and that it would not look back. To illustrate the point, Brnabic said that some regional airports were named after people who had died before they were convicted of war crimes, advisers accused of or sentenced for war crimes, also mentioning a ruling to acquit Naser Oric. She recalled that Lazarevic had traveled to The Hague voluntarily, had done his time and was now a free man. She also explained he didn’t have a full-time post at the Military Academy, but had only been invited to give one lecture.

Brnabic: Hague wasn’t unbiased, didn’t contribute to reconciliation (B92)

Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic says the Hague Tribunal (ICTY) has not been unbiased, and that Serbia fared the worst. Brnabic said she was referring to the overall convictions, and the number of those who died in the ICTY custody. Perhaps such a view is not politically correct, she said, and added that it was her personal opinion. “I do not think the ICTY has participated in the reconciliation in the region, instead it has contributed to the straining of relations in the region. How can one talk about the efficiency of the judiciary in Serbia, when there was a 13-year process in The Hague against Seselj, who was released,” Brnabic said. She then asked, how can someone be given back 13 years of their life,” but also – “what would it be like if the judiciary in Serbia treated somebody like that. She made these statements on the occasion of the official visit of ICTY President Carmel Agius, who will be in Belgrade until Thursday. When asked if she knew the reasons for his arrival here, Brnabic replied, “I personally don’t”.

Vucic meets with Agius (Tanjug)

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic met with President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Carmel Agius in Belgrade on Wednesday. Vucic expressed concern over the treatment of Serbs serving prison terms abroad pursuant to the ICTY’s judgements, as well as over the health of detainees in the ICTY detention unit in The Hague, the presidential press office said in a statement.

Djuric: Suriname’s decision denied all claims from Pristina (Tanjug)

The Head of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija Marko Djuric said that this was wonderful news that denied all claims of authorities in Pristina that the recognition process was irreversible. “This decision of Suriname showed that the battle continues and must continue,” Djuric said and concluded that Serbs in Kosovo were overwhelmed and rejoicing. Djuric added that it was very important that the country took into account argumentation of Serbia and believed that this decision would be important for other countries of Latin America, since this was a country that had some influence in that part of the world.

Dacic: Suriname demonstrated that it is possible to go in the opposite direction (RTS)

“This is an indicator that this process (of recognition) to go in the opposite direction and this is why this event is significant,” Serbian Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic told an RTS broadcast.

Asked whether Catalonia’s case throws a new light on the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue, Dacic says it certainly does. “This is now a new fact. So far this has only been discussed, but now it arrived into their yard, although all this is in some way our yard,” says Dacic. He says that Kosovo didn’t lack autonomy or democratic rights, but even has a higher degree of autonomy, like a republic. “The problem occurred when they wanted a republic,” said Dacic. Asked whether the Catalonia case us opening a new possibility for scenarios such as the one presented within the internal dialogue on Kosovo that Serbia should seek political autonomy for northern Kosovo, Dacic notes that one should first discuss whether Kosovo is a state or not, and then the an autonomy “within that state”. According to him, if the argumentation for self-determination is used that some minority is abused somewhere, then the Serbs in Croatia have had the right a long time ago to create their own state. Dacic noted that there are many difference between Catalonia and Kosovo, but the similarity is that at issue is a unilaterally declared independence in both cases. “The Catalonian nation doesn’t have a state. The Albanian nation has its own state, and those who state that Kosovo is sui generis should first think about this,” said Dacic. He warns that Catalonia could push Europe into chaos. “The first chaotic situation will be created between Belgium and Spain over Pujdamon,” said Dacic.

Selakovic and Djuric about internal dialogue (Tanjug)

The Secretary General in Serbian President’s cabinet Nikola Selakovic assessed yesterday that the internal dialogue on Kosovo should have been launched many years and decades ago, but that it is important that it had started today. “Its content is an argument to anybody who is disrespecting it, declaring is a façade or anti-government activity, here we are listening to what the expert public thinks about a political problem. I think it is never too late,” Selakovic told the press in the Palace of Serbia during a break within the round table on the internal dialogue.

He hopes that the internal dialogue will continue in the next days, adding there is an announcement and interest of scientific institutes who are covering social and humanistic sciences to join the dialogue.

Djuric told the press that he was encouraged with the fact that participants in today’s round table presented arguments seriously and competently. “We want to hear out the entire public before presenting our judgements, we wish to hear our the opinion of the academic community, institutes, academy, to hear out the opinion of all social factors and I think this participation needs to be as wide as possible. Today’s discussion demonstrated that it has capacity,” said Djuric.

Dialogue on Kosovo and Metohija: From an union of Serbia and Kosovo to criticism of possible moves (RTV/Politika)

The academic community, i.e. legal experts within this community, presented yesterday different opinions within the internal dialogue on Kosovo that was launched by Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic. They ranged from a realistic union of Serbia and Kosovo to messages that Serbia should not be making concessions any further. Professor of Constitutional Law Vladan Kutlesic, former Slobodan Milosevic’s special envoy in talks between Serbian government representatives and Kosovo Albanians who took part in the Rambioullet talks in 1999, has stated that in his opinion a realistic solution is a realistic union of Serbia and Kosovo, noting that this is a model that represents an international legal connection of two states in the form of a realistic union. He says this stand is rationally achievable, because it is not emotional. He adds that Serbia should give something here in order to gain, reminding that it still disposed with a part of something that is important for the opposite side, Kosovo and Kosovo Albanians. “ We offered a good deal of what we could offer in the Brussels agreement, the police, judiciary have gone, so to say colloquially,” he says, adding that Serbia should request full territorial-political autonomy for northern Kosovo, not a Community of Municipalities, adding that it would lose what it only formally has. He opines that Serbia would also gain a market that is operating even now, but with lots of black market elements, while the Albanians would gain a state. He notes that it is also necessary to achieve functional autonomy for the cultural heritage in Kosovo that is primarily linked to the Serbian Orthodox Church.

The Dean of the Megatrend Law Facutly Zivko Kulic has stated that he is trying to understand international circumstances, that there are big expectations from the internal dialogue, adding that Serbia should not make hasty moves and mistakes that the generations will be barely able to correct. He adds that Serbia is facing huge responsibility, but that the readiness of the other side is also needed for a solution. “Resolving the status in a just and long-term sustainable way is not possible at this moment,” opines Kulic, wondering what happened to Resolution 1244, the Kumanovo Agreement, the Community of Serb Municipalities, the famous footnote and asterisk…He believes that the Special Court for war crimes in Pristina will come down to mockery of justice. He claims there is no more room for new concessions, and if there are, this is will be confirmation of our weakness. He says that the proposals on division of Kosovo and exchange of territories are wrong and unacceptable, asking how will we exchange “ours for ours”. He also points out that the decrees that concern Kosovo and Metohija should not be erased from the Constitution of Serbia. Noting that he believes that time is on Serbia’s side, he says that the only way out is buying time and balancing.

Debate on the dialogue on Kosovo: Alibi for an already made solution (Beta)

The leader of the League of Social-Democrats of Vojvodina (LSV) Nenad Canak, the leader of the Left of Serbia (LS) Borko Stefanovic and the leader of the European Movement of the Serbs Rada Trajkovic have stated that nobody had invited them to join the “internal dialogue” on Kosovo and agreed that this dialogue is “pretending of talks” since they are essentially looking just for an alibi for a solution that somebody had already passed. “The purpose of the internal dialogue is not finding a solution, but Vucic needs an alibi for something that he doesn’t dare say. I don’t see what is gained by these talks, except for concealing something that Vucic had promised that he would resolve,” said Stefanovic, who used to be the head of the team for negotiations with Kosovo, at the Institute for European Affairs in Belgrade dubbed “An Internal Dialogue or Monologue?”.

Even though he has not been invited to take part in the “institutionalized internal dialogue”, Canak says that he would have gladly accepted the invitation, because it is better to talk for 100 years than to wage a war for one day. “I don’t have an illusion that the dialogue with the authorities would yield results, the issue is what is the alternative?” wondered Canak. He reiterated his stand that Kosovo was an independent state. “Kosovo is independent, I would like things to be different, but they are not,” said Canak, and turned towards Trajkovic, asking: “Do you think that Kosovo can be integrated into Serbia?” and she responded affirmatively.

Former Kosovo MP Rada Trajkovic has stated that she assumes that the solution of the Kosovo issue already exists, adding that she would be afraid to take part in the dialogue. “Look at what is happening with people who think differently: anyone who has presented an opinion opposed to the ruling has always been attacked. What happened at the last elections? They are forcing us to vote as they want us to,” said Trajkovic. She warns that since the recent local elections in Kosovo, the Serbs have been institutionally losing their state, because “Kosovo has completed its institutional capacity” to which Serb List representatives had given legitimacy. “The Serbs in northern Kosovo boycotted the last elections, while this time voter turnout was so large that now we have reports that the Serbs integrated into the Kosovo institutions, that they accepted Kosovo institutions as their own, meaning that the next step is reduction of the capacity of the United Nations Mission and its withdrawal,” opines Trajkovic. She notes that Kosovo now has judicial, executive, and legislative authority and that it only lacks an army, but if they accept the proposal that ten percent of the Serbs should take part in the Kosovo armed forces, this would enable their official transformation into an army. “The only way for the Serbian Army to return to Kosovo is for Serbia to become a NATO member,” said Trajkovic.

Stefanovic underlined that no one can expect Kosovo to be incorporated into Serbia. According to him, there are five possible solutions for Kosovo: maintaining a status quo, division of Kosovo, recognition of Kosovo, an armed conflict and drafting a comprehensive binding document without substantive recognition of independence. “If someone says there is a sixth solution, this person should receive a Nobel Prize,” said Stefanovic, adding he advocates a comprehensive agreement that would define in detail relations and membership in international organizations, but under condition that Kosovo never receives UN membership.

And while Canak mockingly commented in the debate the fact the Suriname withdrew its recognition of independence of Kosovo, Trajkovic and Stefanovic assessed that this was an important piece of news. “This might be the message: ‘You see that nothing will happen if you withdraw recognition, because nothing happened when you recognized either’,” said Stefanovic, adding that a big thing would be when somebody from the region would withdraw recognition.

Sutanovac: Parliamentary debate on Kosovo (Beta)

On the occasion of the first round table on the internal dialogue on Kosovo and Metohija, the leader of the Democratic Party (DS) Dragan Sutanovac has stated that the DS expects that a real dialogue opens in the parliament, and not a pretending one. He told Beta that the parliament is the only right place for dialogue on substantively important issues for the state and society.

Gajic: It is possible to withdraw recognition (Tanjug)

Law professor of the Belgrade University Aleksandar Gajic has stated that it is possible to withdraw recognition of statehood, especially the one opposed to UNSCR 1244 that regulates the issue of the status of Kosovo and Metohija. According to international law, Kosovo is a territory under international administration that is within the Republic of Serbia, so recognitions are also disputable, Gajic told Tanjug.

Dikovic discussed situation in Kosovo with KFOR Commander (RTS/Tanjug)

Chief of Staff of the Serbian Army, General Ljubisa Dikovic, met in Banjica 2 barracks with KFOR Commander, Major-General Giovanni Funge, and discussed the current security situation in Kosovo and Metohija and along the administrative line with our southern province. They also discussed the realization of joint activities of the Serbian Army and KFOR.

REGIONAL PRESS

Dacic: Border dispute between Croatia-Serbia is much bigger than border dispute btw Serbia-B&H (TV1)

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic met on Tuesday with members of commission in charge of issues related to borders between B&H and Serbia. Commenting on this issue, Serbian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ivica Dacic said that a much bigger border dispute, than the one between B&H and Serbia, will be the one between Croatia and B&H. According to Dacic, several points are disputable in border dispute between Serbia and B&H and those are: the railway Belgrade-Bar, i.e. one part that goes through B&H and the hydro power plants on the Drina River.

B&H Judiciary should not be training ground for foreigners to flex muscles (Srna)

RS Prime Minister Zeljka Cvijanovic says that the judiciary in B&H has to be fixed so that it can serve the citizens, instead of being a training ground where foreigners will flex their muscles and defend their own deviations they would never defend in their own countries.

Cvijanovic is certain every citizen in Republika Srpska (RS) is deeply dissatisfied with the performance of the Court and Prosecutor’s Office of B&H. “Their discontent is based on the procedure used to implement the War Crimes Strategy, that is, the work done by the judicial institutions to implement the strategy. You can’t just erase the discontent by holding a referendum or not. The discontent is present in one half of the country,” Cvijanovic told reporters in Brod.  This dissatisfaction should be seriously dealt with, she said, in order to avoid the situation where foreigners and embassies defend all the deviations in the B&H judiciary they would never defend in their own home countries. She reiterated that a referendum on the Court and Prosecutor’s Office of B&H should not be conducted until a full consensus /including the government and opposition/ was reached, and be along the lines of what President Milorad Dodik had said concerning the matter.

B&H extradites suspected IS operative from Kosovo to US (Zurnal.info)

B&H, acting under a shroud of secrecy, on Tuesday extradited a suspected operative of the Islamic State (IS) terrorist organization to the United States, which has sought him for years, B&H media said. The suspect Mirsad Kandic was handed over to the US authorities at Sarajevo airport. A special plane was sent for him from the US. Zurnal.info, writes that Kandic had actually been located and arrested in July in a rented apartment in the Sarajevo district of Grbavica, where he was living under an assumed name using falsified ID documents. He apparently arrived in Bosnia and Herzegovina in January this year. According to available information, Kandic, born in Kosovo in 1981, lived in the US for years and possessed a green card. He was put on a US wanted list in 2014 and an international warrant for his arrest was issued two years later. A New York court has issued an arrest warrant for Kandic based on charges of terrorism. He is charged with assisting a foreign terrorist organization.

Kandic is wanted in connection with the case of Australian teenager Jake Bilardi, known as Jihadi Jake, who blew himself up in a suicide car bomb attack in Ramadi, Iraq on March 11, 2015. Bilardi was allegedly recruited by Kandic. Before arriving in B&H, Kandic had spent time in IS-controlled territory in Syria, namely in Raqqa, the capital of the self-proclaimed terrorist caliphate. He went under the names of Al Bosni Abdula Rahim, Kandoq Mirsad and Rahim Abdul. Kandic was assigned the task of supplying suicide bombers with special vests and weapons. Correspondence via the WhatsApp instant messenger service, intercepted by intelligence agencies, showed that he was in touch with some of the most influential people in the IS structure.

Original copy of Dayton Agreement found in Pale during raid (Dnevni avaz)

Members of the Republika Srpska (RS) Ministry of Interior (MoI) found on Tuesday the original copy of the Dayton Peace Agreement during the raid of home of Zeljko Kuntos in Pale. Director of the RS Police Darko Culum stated for the daily that the arrested person was forwarded to the RS Prosecutor’s Office for further processing. He added that this person was arrested under suspicion of being involved in trading in influence and abuses. Namely, the RS MoI received information of operative character that the document is in the house of the suspect. The RS MoI did not unveil which version of the Dayton Agreement this is. The daily notes that Kuntos used to be a close associate and guard of former Speaker of the RS National Assembly Dragan Kalinic, and today he is active member of the RS MoI. Kalinic is acting as advisor of RS President Milorad Dodik today. The daily also learns that Kalinic used to be bodyguard of the former RS Minister of Interior Aleksa Buha, who took part in negotiations and was present during the signing of the Dayton Agreement in Paris.

Damjanovic: Return to parliament is not premature (Pobjeda)

MP Aleksandar Damjanovic spoke to Pobjeda and said that the return of 19 opposition MPs to the Parliament, during the prime minister hour, was a result of an agreement.

“This was not a premature act but an agreement between a part of opposition colleagues, with a goal of exposing certain important political and economic matters to the public sans censorship”, Damjanovic said. He, along with his DF colleagues, stopped the boycott and attended Parliament’s session on Wednesday. Damjanovic said that the most of opposition is led by their own interests. “The citizens will be the judge on fair and democratic elections. We still have to fight to make the elections truly fair and free”, he said. He added that the elections without amendments to the electoral laws would be inacceptable.

Russia refuses to extradite Nikic (Pobjeda)

Russian authorities will not extradite Montenegrin citizen Ananije Nino Nikic, DF official translator, who is a suspect in the attempted terrorist attack investigation. He was awarded a refugee status, it was stated to Pobjeda from the Ministry of Justice. This decision of Moscow leads to conclude that, after DF translator gave them information on the act planned for October 16th, they decided to stop his extradition in order to hide some details that would be unfavorable to Russia.

MPs return to work after pause for local elections (MIA)

Parliament speaker Talat Xhaferi has scheduled the 18th session for Wednesday, which is the first following the 2017 local elections. Today’s agenda include draft decision on amending the decision on sending a member of the Army of the Republic of Macedonia (ARM) to participate in UN peacekeeping operation in Lebanon (UNIFIL), request for authentic interpretation of article 15, paragraph 4, line 5 and article 69 from the Law on Construction Land submitted by the Mayor of Ilinden municipality, request for authentic interpretation of article 12 and article 13 of the Law on Construction Land submitted by the acting mayor of Struga municipality, and also other items.

US Embassy: The new mayors to be transparent, available and responsible (Meta)

“Strong local government lays the foundation for a vibrant democracy. We encourage the newly elected mayors and counselors to be open, responsive, and accountable to the citizens of their municipalities,” said in this addressing the US Embassy about the local elections. The embassy states that the cooperation with the municipalities, organizations and the citizens will continue in order to promote the key reforms on a local level. “We welcome OSCE/ODIHR’s preliminary conclusions that the elections were competitive and that respect for fundamental freedoms contributed towards a democratic process. These findings are consistent with what the U.S. Embassy teams observed in both the first and second rounds of elections. Where there are concerns about irregularities and abuses, we again urge citizens to report them through the appropriate procedures and relevant authorities to address them promptly,” states further the announcement. The Embassy recommends the State Election Commission and other state institutions to use this period after the election process in order to focus on ODIHR’s recommendations that were provided after the elections in 2016 and 2017 in order to strengthen the future election processes.

International support for priority reforms of intelligence and security services within Plan 3-6-9 (MIA)

Government delegation led by Prime Minister Zoran Zaev, Minister of Interior Oliver Spasovski and Vice Premier for European Affairs Bujar Osmani met Tuesday with EU Ambassador Samuel Zbogar, United States Ambassador Jess Baily, British Ambassador Charles Garrett, Netherlands Ambassador Wouter Plomp, Swedish Ambassador Mats Staffansson, and Swiss Ambassador Sybille Suter Tejada. The meeting focused on the Government’s commitment to the activities within Plan 3-6-9 related to reforms of intelligence and security services.

The ambassadors presented the possibility of involving the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) in future activities, especially in supporting the process of enhancing parliamentary and judicial control over these services, the Government said in a press release. The ambassadors voiced the readiness of their governments to support these essential reforms in Macedonia both through technical and financial support. Zaev said the government perceives that reforms in the field should be transparent, thorough, comprehensive and under full control of institutions. Furthermore, the government is prepared to financially support these reforms, taking into consideration the significance of the rule of law, respect of fundamental human rights, as well as their role in acceleration of the Macedonia’s Euro-integration process, reads the press release.

Kosovo – Albania, agreement on pensions soon (ATA)

Albania and Kosovo are set to sign soon an agreement on pensions. The main topic under discussion at a meeting on Tuesday between minister of Labor and Social Welfare Skender Recica and ambassador of Albania to Kosovo, Qemal Minxhozi, was the agreement on authentication of insurance coverage periods for pension entitlement of Kosovo and Albanian citizens. Minister Recica thanked ambassador Minxhozi for his visit as well as the ongoing support of Albania towards Kosovo. Minister Recica and ambassador Minxhozi vowed to further their cooperation.

INTERNATIONAL MEDIA SOURCES

Suriname Triggers New Phase in Kosovo Recognition Battle (Balkan Insight, by James Ker-Lindsay, 1 November 2017)

The apparent decision of a Latin American state to revoke its recognition of Kosovo shows the diplomatic struggle over Serbia’s former province is far from over.

It is hard to believe that it has been almost a decade since Kosovo declared independence from Serbia, on 17 February 2008. At the time, it was an extraordinarily controversial move.

Ordinarily, the international community has a strong aversion to unilateral acts of secession.

Since 1945, only one country, Bangladesh, had managed to break away from an existing state and become a full member of the UN. International opinion was divided over Kosovo’s statehood. Arguing that it was a unique case, arising from the break-up of Yugoslavia, and believing it to be necessary for Balkan stability, Kosovo was quickly recognised by the United States, Britain, France, Germany and many other Western states. By contrast, many other countries, including Russia, India, China, Brazil, and South Africa, saw it as a dangerous precedent and refused to accept its independent status. In the years that followed, the winds seemed to be blowing firmly in Kosovo’s favour. By the end of 2008, over 50 countries had recognised it. Meanwhile, Serbia’s effort to secure an advisory opinion on the legality of the Declaration of Independence from the International Court of Justice produced an inconclusive result. By 2012, almost 100 of the 193 members of the United Nations had recognised Kosovo.
At that stage, Serbia appeared to have all but given up its efforts to persuade countries not to accept the independence of its former province. Meanwhile, under pressure from the EU, it was now engaged in a process of normalising its relations with Pristina. To many, it seemed as if this was paving the way for Belgrade’s eventual recognition of Kosovo’s statehood. Serbia’s politicians even appeared to be softening up public opinion for what seemed to be an inevitable decision to “let Kosovo go”. However, over the past five years, the situation has subtly, but noticeably, changed. The pace of recognitions has slowed dramatically. Currently, around 110 countries recognise Kosovo. At the same time, Serbia has begun to increase its counter-recognition efforts again. Most notably, in 2015 it fought a tough campaign to prevent Kosovo from joining UNESCO. To the surprise of many observers, the vote narrowly went against Pristina. Since then, there has been little for Kosovo to cheer about. Last year, just two countries recognised Kosovo.

This year, just one country has done so. It is against this backdrop that the news has now emerged that a country has now gone so far as to change its mind over Kosovo’s statehood.

Unsurprisingly, the news has been greeted with jubilation in Belgrade. By contrast, Pristina is in denial. The immediate reaction from the foreign ministry was a statement arguing that revocation is not possible. As it happens, legal opinion is divided on this question. Many scholars have indeed argued that it is not possible to revoke recognition. In one sense, they are right.
A state cannot simply announce that it no longer recognises the sovereignty of a state over a territory. Instead, it must announce that it recognises the sovereignty of an alternative state of the territory in question. In this regard, the letter from Suriname, which only spoke of revocation, was incorrectly drafted. However, as the letter was sent to Serbia, it would imply that the revocation was clearly in Belgrade’s favour. Whatever the legal merits of the letter, it seems that Suriname has taken the decision to “revoke” its recognition of Kosovo’s statehood. However, it is also important to put the move in its proper context. The decision of one country, though symbolically important, is not as significant as the question of whether this will mark the start of a wider trend. One cannot ignore the fact that the move comes at pivotal moment. Catalonia’s declaration of independence has brought the question of secession to the forefront of international attention. In this context, the question inevitably arises as to whether Suriname’s decision is a response to growing fears over secession. It may have been. Others have suggested that it may be due to pro-Russian sentiment.
Whatever the exact reason for Suriname’s decision, on balance it would seem unlikely to change much in the short term. While some observers may believe that events in Spain have undermined Kosovo’s efforts to gain further recognition, the reality is that all the easy wins had already been secured. Gaining more was always going to be tough. Equally, there is little reason to believe that many states will reconsider their decisions to recognise Kosovo. Certainly, Kosovo’s main international supporters will remain steadfast in the positions. Looking ahead, however, Suriname’s decision may yet be significant. We may yet see this as the moment the stalemate over recognition came to an end. While some in Belgrade will want to capitalise on the decision and persuade other countries to follow suit, it may also push Kosovo’s key supporters to renew their efforts to secure Kosovo’s place in the international community by leaning on Serbia.

While the EU cannot force Serbia to recognise Kosovo, largely because five of its own members do not recognise it, there is nothing to stop individual members from insisting that Serbia recognise Kosovo as the price for membership.

After years of stagnation, and seeing the way the winds are blowing, these countries [most notably Germany] may now redouble their efforts to firmly encourage Belgrade in this direction – albeit once the fallout from Catalonia secession crisis has blown over. In its way, Suriname’s decision may just have started a new phase of the Kosovo recognition battle.
James Ker-Lindsay is Professor of Politics and Policy and St Mary’s University, Twickenham, and Senior Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He is the author of ‘Kosovo: The Path to Contested Statehood in the Balkans’, (I.B. Tauris), and ‘The Foreign Policy of Counter Secession: Preventing the Recognition of Contested States’, (Oxford University Press). He is completing an introductory guide to secession for Oxford University Press. 
The opinions expressed in the comments section are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the views of BIRN.

Lavrov: Serbia under pressure like Ukraine in 2004 (RIA, 31 October 2017)

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said that the pressure exerted by the U.S. on Serbia to choose between cooperation with Moscow and the EU is similar to that exerted by the

EU on Ukraine ahead of a series of pro-EU events in 2004. In a meeting with the Association of European Businesses on Oct. 31, Lavrov said that continued U.S. pressure on Belgrade to choose between cooperation with Russia and the EU represented interfering with Serbia’s internal affairs, recalling that similar statements were voiced by the EU in 2004, during the first Euromaidan in Kiev. “Then, Ukraine was also told to choose – either Russia or Europe,” Lavrov said, as quoted by news agency RIA. Lavrov said this commenting on statements by U.S.

Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Hoyt Brian Yee that Belgrade had to make a choice – either the EU or Russia, and that Washington backed Serbia’s EU choice.

“As if it is impossible to maintain friendly ties with both sides,” Lavrov said, wondering: “Isn’t that interfering with a country’s internal affairs?”

Why hasn’t Bosnia and Herzegovina collapsed? (The Economist, by T.J., 1 November 2017)

Rumours of its demise are greatly exaggerated

FROM Spain to Ukraine, and from Scotland to northern Italy, regional issues threaten the make-up of European states. Similar expectations persist regarding Bosnia. Ever since the end of the Bosnian war in 1995, foreign politicians, journalists and analysts have warned about the country’s seemingly imminent implosion. Years after ending his stint as “High Representative” for Bosnia between 2002 and 2006, Paddy Ashdown spoke of his fears that the country was moving towards separation. But this has not happened. Even as the future of other European countries is put in doubt, Bosnia plods on. Why has it not collapsed?

The war pitted Bosnia’s three main ethnic groups—Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks (Muslims)—against one another. The country had imploded after the collapse of Yugoslavia, and Serbia and Croatia strove to include it in their plans for, respectively, a Greater Serbia and a Greater Croatia. The communities now live more separately than they did before the war, but at an individual level people still rub along. The peace agreement that signalled the war’s end was accompanied by complex formulas about how the country would be run. As a result, the national presidency is shared between a Serb, a Croat and a Bosniak (pictured above), who take turns serving as its chairman it every eight months. Modern Bosnia is made up of two ethnically based “entities”, which both have governments and presidents, plus Brcko, an autonomous town. One entity is the Serb-dominated Republika Srpska and the other is the Federation, dominated by Bosniaks and Croats. The Federation consists of ten cantons, each with its own prime minister. All this is ridiculous, say critics. But such complications are hardly unique to Bosnia. The United Kingdom, after all, has four entities, three regional parliaments and a head of state who must be a member of the Church of England. Power in Bosnia lies with the entities and the cantons, not the national government—but something similar happens in Switzerland. Focusing on performances, rather than job titles, reveals the country’s strengths. Bosnia may have five presidents and myriad prime ministers, but its elections see a constant churn of parties and coalitions taking power.

Even though governance in Bosnia can be dysfunctional, fears of a return to violence have a pacifying effect. The president of Republika Srpska has been threatening for years to hold what would be an illegal referendum on independence. But worried, perhaps, by the potential for strife and by the absence of support from abroad, he has held back. Bosnians have always managed to put their differences aside to form governments at all levels, whereas there have been none in Northern Ireland since January. Bosnians tend to be far more flexible than outsiders give them credit for. (The government of the Republika Srpska has several Bosniaks and Croats in it, working with the president’s Serb nationalist party, which is committed to a referendum.)

The system puts an emphasis on consensus. Formally or informally, governments in Bosnia need partners, who will often come from different ethnic groups. But Bosnia has struggled to throw off an old reputation. Gerald Knaus, the head of the European Stability Initiative (ESI), a Berlin-based think-tank, rejects the “clichés that Bosnia is uniquely dysfunctional and that Bosnians are irrationally obsessed with ethnicity in a way that you don’t find anywhere else in Europe.” He blames these clichés, in part, for the country’s plight: the EU (to which Bosnia has applied for candidate status) and outsiders set conditions for the country which, when they cannot fulfil them, “are taken as evidence that Bosnia is uniquely dysfunctional”. In the past, for example, the EU has demanded constitutional reform. But the Bosnians have proved unable to do this, and it ends up dragging the country ever further behind its neighbours. “It is,” says Mr Knaus, “a vicious circle.”

World Jewish Congress wants to trigger a debate about Holocaust revisionism in Croatia (BIRN, by Sven Milekic, 30 October 2017)

The World Jewish Congress wants to trigger a debate about Holocaust revisionism in Croatia, to encourage acknowledgement of the crimes committed at the Croatian WWII fascist camp at Jasenovac during WWII, activist Menachem Rosensaft told BIRN. US law professor Menachem Z. Rosensaft, who recently sparked media interest with an article entitled ‘Croatia is brazenly attempting to rewrite its holocaust crimes out of history’, said that the country has to face up to the facts and not revise its past. He expressed concern that Croatian political leaders could be giving different messages depending on whether they are speaking abroad or at home, to their own people. The Congress is currently engaged in an international campaign against Holocaust revisionism and the downplaying of the crimes that were committed, especially at Jasenovac. Implementing racial laws against Serbs, Jews and Roma, the Croatian WWII fascist Ustasa movement killed over 83,000 people at the Jasenovac camp between 1941 and 1945.

Rosensaft said that his attention grew when he saw the Jewish community boycotting the annual official commemorations at camp’s memorial site. In the last two years, both the Jewish and Serbian communities in Croatia have refused to attend the commemorations in a sign of protest against what they claim is the revival of fascist values in Croatian politics. Rosensaft said that the Congress campaign “isn’t a campaign against Croatia”, but rather an effort to bring public attention both inside and outside Croatia to the issue of the Holocaust as it was implemented in Croatia. This debate would potentially lead to events such as conferences or even an international commission for establishing the facts on Jasenovac, he added. “The figures of the numbers of victims shouldn’t be a subject of political debate between Croats, Serbs and Jews, but should be established by independent internationally known historians and scholars, whether from the US Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington or from Yad Vashem [Holocaust remembrance centre in Jerusalem], and they must also include Croatian and Serbian historians, representatives of the Croatian Jewish Community, and representatives of the Roma who were also murdered at Jasenovac,” Rosensaft argued. He said that “none of the genocides and atrocities [against Serbs, Jews, Roma and anti-fascists] that took place at Jasenovac should ever be politicized”. “In this aspect, there is really no difference between Jews or Serbs or Roma: they were murdered in the same place, they were murdered by the same perpetrators, and they deserve the dignity of being remembered and commemorated with decency and truth,” he emphasized. Amid growing good relations with Israel, Croatian President Kolinda Grabar Kitarovic visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem in 2015 and expressed regret for the Jews who died at the hands of the Ustasa. However Grabar Kitarovic has never attended the official commemorations in Jasenovac, and has only made an unannounced personal visit, which has caused concerns among victims’ associations. The crimes at Jasenovac were committed by the Ustasa alone, and not directed or enforced by the Germans, he stressed. “It doesn’t do any service to anyone if it is suggested that the crimes at Jasenovac were perpetrated by some unknown individuals. The murders and tortures at Jasenovac were perpetrated by the Ustasa. We know who they were, we know their names, and we know who the commandants were. We know exactly who was responsible, this is not a mystery,” he said.

Tirana Brokers Deal Uniting Montenegro’s Albanian Parties (BIRN, 31 October 2017)

Albania has hailed an election deal, which it helped to mediate, between four ethnic Albanian political parties in Montenegro – designed to strengthen the community’s hand in the neighboring country. Tirana has again helped to broker a deal for ethnic Albanian parties outside the country’s borders that aims to unite them in elections and maximize their power. Four Albanian parties from the majority Albanian area in Montenegro of Malesia, which is an administrative part of the capital, Podgorica, have signed an agreement pledging to pick candidates together for the local elections on November 26. “We agree, for the local elections in November, to try to maximize the result in favor of Albanian candidates,” the agreement, which BIRN has seen, reads. The document, signed by the Albanian Alternative party, the Democratic Albanian Union, the Albanian Democratic League and Democratic Forum for Integration, emphasized that their main aim is to gain control of local control in the town of Tuzi, in the Malesia area, which has around 11,000 voters. “We are going to act together to get a majority on the communal council of Tuzi,” the statement noted. Albanian government sources told BIRN on Tuesday that they worked hard to make the deal possible. On Tuesday, the Albanian Foreign Ministry greeted the “Tuzi deal” in a press release. “We welcome the reflection of Albanian political and social factors in Montenegro, to draw lessons from past problems, splits and failures,” it read. This not the first time that Albania has taken action to help strengthen the hand of the Albanian community in Montenegro.

In September 2016, ahead of the general election in Montenegro, the three main ethnic Albanian parties, Forca, the Democratic Albanian Union, UDSH, and the Albanian Alternative, agreed to run together in a coalition, to get more seats in parliament and so boost the fight for national rights. The ethnic Albanian parties in last year’s elections in Montenegro all backed the Democratic Party of Socialists of former Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic in exchange for pledges of more local power. The government promised to grant independent municipal status to the town of Tuzi not later than May of this year. However, this is not yet a done deal, although it was a central topic of discussion during the meeting of Albanian Foreign Minister Ditmir Bushati with his Montenegrin counterpart, Srdan Darmanovic, in January. It was also an important topic during the April visit of Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama and Bushati to Podgorica, where they met Prime Minister Dusko Markovic. According to the 2011 census, 30,439 Albanians live in Montenegro making up 4.91 per cent of Montenegro’s population.