LOCAL PRESS

Brnabic: London’s intention is not serious and is politically insincere (RTS/Tanjug/Novosti)

On the occasion of the news that London doesn’t want the situation in Kosovo and Metohija to be discussed in the UN Security Council, Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic said: “I consider that not to be serious… especially coming from a country that is leaving the EU,” Brnabic said. She recalled that a summit of Western Balkans prime ministers was held in June in London, within the Berlin Process. “I can’t understand how on one hand somebody wants to host such a meeting, and on the other doesn’t want to include the topic of Kosovo in the agenda. It can’t be both, that’s not serious and is politically insincere,” Brnabic said. She says the issue of Kosovo and Metohija is important not only for lasting normalization of Belgrade-Pristina relations, but also for the overall regional stability and cooperation. According to Novosti, London has made such a decision because it believes that the situation in Kosovo is good and there is no need for it. Serbian Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic says this turn of events was expected, and that the UK is obviously not interested in the Serbian position. “To us, this is a clear message,” Dacic told Novosti. The discussion about the UNSC agenda for the next three months is currently taking place, and that London has not nominated the Kosovo issue, but that Russia and China are against this – and that the outcome should be known by the end of the week.

Ruzic: Not acceptable to discuss exchange of territories (N1)

The idea of exchanging territories with Kosovo, which has been mentioned lately, cannot be legitimate and it is not acceptable to discuss this at all, said the Serbian Minister of Public Administration and Local Self-Government Branko Ruzic on Monday. To the statement of the reporter from N1 TV that the idea of exchanging territories was not a new one, but that until now it had not been mentioned so much and the question of whether this was part of Belgrade’s negotiating tactic and whether the idea was legitimate, Ruzic replied that nobody on the Serbian side had officially suggested this as a possible solution. “Many trains have passed that we did not make use of – for which we all together bear the responsibility, all the politicians and political elites that have been in power during all these years,” said Ruzic, the deputy leader of the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS). “No one has mentioned this, nor is it acceptable for us to

discuss the exchange of territories. Is it, simply, rational and realistic to at this moment discuss it… The epilogue of the dialogue will depend on statesman’s wisdom, which is, I am certain, not lacking on our side… However, it is also important that those who are sitting in Prisina, listen to the echo of their own personal view of the situation instead of representing other people’s policy, he said. When the Kosovo side achieves this, I am certain that we will arrive at a compromise,” Ruzic added.

Lithuania blocking chapter over Russia (Novosti)

Lithuania continues to oppose Serbia opening EU accession negotiations Chapter 31 on foreign, security and defense policy. The reason for this is primarily the relationship between Belgrade and Moscow, and the Serbian Minister for EU Integration Jadranka Joksimovic says that the opening of the chapter in question is unlikely to happen by the end of the year. “The negotiation procedure is such that if you know in the middle of the current year that the report has not been adopted, then it is clear it can be difficult to open (the chapter) by the end of the year,” Joksimovic told Novosti, when asked whether it should be expected that chapter 31 would be opened by the end of the year, and why the screening report has been awaited for four years.

“Chapter 31 was usually not too demanding, but as international relations complicated and EU states themselves had to agree to reach consensus on some issues, the expectations from some members towards the candidates have changed,” she said. Asked if Lithuania was the only EU member that is against Belgrade opening this chapter, Joksimovic said that according to EU rules the screening report for Chapter 31 is the subject of a closed diplomatic debate between its 28 members. “It needs to be understood that in assessing each issue of relevance to the foreign and security policy of a member, they proceed from their own national interests and raise it by consensus to the level of a common EU policy. The candidate country is expected to achieve alignment with the EU common foreign and security policy gradually,” said Joksimovic.

She pointed out to the fact that Serbia is one of the countries that most contribute to European security in our region. “We proved this during our chairmanship of the OSCE during the migration crisis, in the fight against terrorism… As a state that is not a member of any military-political alliance, we have the obligation and the right to take care of our own security and our own national interests. Serbia’s foreign policy coordinates with thus defined policy of national security, and the framework is certainly the process of European integration, which is our foreign policy priority,” Joksimovic said.

Odalovic: Fate of some 28,000 people missing in 1990s wars known (Politika)

The Chairperson of the government Commission for Missing People Veljko Odalovic told Politika that the bodies of 4,000 people killed during the 1990s wars in former Yugoslavia were still at the morgues across the former country waiting for identifications. He added that the DNA samples had been taken and that the international forensic experts were working on identifications. Odalovic said that a total of 40,000 people were declared missing and that the fate of 70 percent, or 28,000, had been discovered so far. He says that Croatia handed over 23 bodies of the Serb victims to Belgrade in June, while Zagreb was seeking a Belgrade investigation into a location near Bogojevo, a village in Serbia’s northern province of Vojvodina, for missing Croats. Croatia also asked for an additional probe into the parts of the Danube river’s water flow.

REGIONAL PRESS

Beginning of process of construction of Peljesac Bridge sparks reactions in B&H (N1)

A number of Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) officials have reacted to the beginning of the process of construction of the Peljesac Bridge. Chairman of the B&H Presidency Bakir Izetbegovic wrote a letter reminding of the fact that B&H disapproves construction of the Peljesac Bridge. He explained that B&H is not denying Croatia’s right to construct this bridge, but it has to defend its own interests. “The announcement that the Republic of Croatia will begin the works on construction of the Peljesac Bridge, ignoring the objections of competent institutions of B&H and provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, represents flagrant violation of the sovereign right of B&H to have access to international waters. The Republic of Croatia has been avoiding for more than 12 years to reach a demarcation agreement with B&H, which has to happen before Croatia practices its right to connect its territories and before B&H practices its right to access to international waters,” reads the letter. Izetbegovic also confirmed the information that potential lawsuits before the International Court of Justice in The Hague and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg are being prepared. Chairman of the B&H Council of Ministers Denis Zvizdic also sent a letter to Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic, President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker and the EU Commissioners in charge of these issues. Zvizdic reminded of all the problems that B&H has with Croatia when it comes to the Peljesac Bridge. He once again warned that this is the last warning for Croatia – if it does not suspend construction of the bridge until its bilateral issues with B&H are solved, B&H will seek justice before the international judicial institutions.

B&H Minister of Civil Affairs Adil Osmanovic also confirmed that B&H is likely to file a lawsuit against Croatia due to such move. “We will once again send a letter, primarily to Plenkovic, asking him to launch the talks about the sea border demarcation. If he ignores this too, I am sorry to say that B&H will have to defend its rights before international judicial institutions,” Osmanovic explained. However, former Croat member of the B&H Presidency Zeljko Komsic assessed that there are no formal or legal conditions for the lawsuit to be filed, referring to the need for consensus among the three members of the B&H Presidency. B&H Minister of Communications and Transport Ismir Jusko assessed that B&H authorities reacted with delay, wondering what the previous convocations of the B&H Parliament did with regard to this issue. “Why did they wait for 11 years to launch some things? There was no reaction for almost eight years, except for four letters that have been sent since 2015,” Jusko argued.

At the same time, there have been no reactions coming from HDZ B&H and Republika Srpska.

Maas: Enlargement to Western Balkans is EU’s strategic interest (Oslobodjenje)

German Minister of Foreign Affairs Heiko Maas stated on Monday that unless the EU fails to continue with the enlargement process, Russia and China might take over. He said that the enlargement to the Western Balkans is in strategic interest of the EU. Following his meeting with Albanian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ditmir Bushati, Maas said that Germany is “very, very positive when it comes to enlargement of the EU to the Western Balkans, because they firmly believe it is in a strategic interest of a free Europe”. Also, German Minister pointed out he is convinced that the people in the Western Balkans want to live like those in the EU live, not like those in China or Russia.

Grabar- Kitarovic: We will not say to anyone to join NATO (Dnevni list)

Croatian President Kolinda Grabar- Kitarovic said that she supports enlargement of NATO, but deems that every country needs to decide for itself whether to join the Alliance or not. “I respect the will of those who refused that, but Croatia will provide political support to the countries that wish to join NATO and assist them to meet the conditions necessary for the association with the Alliance. I deem that Euro-Atlantic integration of all countries of the South- Eastern Europe is a necessary condition for peace and stability in the region. Dialogue with Russia is necessary because that is a big country without which world issues cannot be solved and Russia, as a guarantor of Dayton Peace Agreement, plays an important role in SEE. It is important for us that Russia supports territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) and we continue to work together on stabilization in this country, which has almost thousand kilometers of joint border with Croatia. Croats in B&H are one of three nation-building peoples and if they separate, this could result in destabilization of the entire region,” said Grabar- Kitarovic.

Serwer: Trump has already undermined NATO and collective security (Pobjeda)

American President Donald Trump is making big problems to the Alliance, although he won’t exclude US from the NATO. “If he keeps making statements which are an implication that he is going to breach article 5, which is the foundation of the collective security and which stipulates that attack on one member is also an attack on all members, the damage has already been done,” says American analyst Daniel Serwer. He pointed out that the Alliance won’t recover from Trump’s way of acting as long as somebody else, who is truly dedicated to collective security, takes his place. The Senior United States Senator, encouraged by the Trump’s statement he made about Montenegro recently, decided to adopt the law which would forbid American president to withdraw from NATO Alliance. “Unfortunately, Trump’s ‘abuse’ of our closest cooperates, raised serious doubts as to America’s commitment to Transatlantic alliance and values of defense,” said the Senior United States Senator, John McCain.

Parliament endorses decision on referendum, slated for September 30 (MIA)

The parliament endorsed Monday the decision over a consultative referendum on the name agreement to take place on September 30. Sixty-eight MPs supported the decision, with the opposition deputies absent from the vote. The referendum question will read “Are you in favor of EU and NATO membership by accepting the Agreement between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Greece?”. VMRO-DPMNE MPs left the parliament hall after deputy Nikola Micevski elaborated the party’s position that the referendum question is imprecise, ambiguous and manipulative, while the consultative aspect leaves the result open for interpretation.

VMRO-DPMNE also submitted two amendments to the referendum decision, which were rejected.

VMRO-DPMNE says no consensus on referendum question (MIA)

VMRO-DPMNE MPs have not signed the referendum initiative that is set to be discussed at a session in Parliament on Monday afternoon. Opposition deputies will attend the session and present their arguments against the referendum question. VMRO-DPMNE Secretary-General Igor Janusev failed to say if the party would call on its members to boycott the referendum, probably to take place on September 30. “The established democratic practice of formulating the referendum question has been quashed. VMRO-DPMNE has not accepted the decorum role and presented arguments why the question should be unambiguous,” said Janusev. The question in the referendum initiative signed by the ruling majority reads Are you in favor of EU and NATO membership by supporting the agreement between Macedonia and Greece? Janusev said the referendum question that is put forward violates the law, because it is two-sided and manipulative. “Article 15 of the Law on Referendum says the question on the ballot must be precisely formulated and be unequivocal, so that citizens can answer with For or Against. The questions related to other topics are equivocal and can be confusing. The referendum question must be clear and precise, linked only to the name agreement,” noted Janusev. According to him, the authorities are scared because people reject the agreement. “The agreement reached by PM Zoran Zaev is one thing, while the issue of NATO and EU membership is entirely another” stressed Janusev.

Political parties, must be united on reforms (ADN)

The Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, Ditmir Bushati, held a joint press conference this Monday with his German counterpart, Heiko Maas. During the meeting, Maas called on all politicians to support Albania’s important reforms. “Albania has achieved results. Your efforts are impressive. I call on political actors to support the important country reforms,” said Mass. Meanwhile, Bushati thanked his counterpart for the given support to Albania in the road to EU. “We thank Germany for its continued support to Albania’s European path. We will use the next 12 months giving our maximum,” said Bushati.

INTERNATIONAL MEDIA SOURCES

Hahn on Western Balkans: Exporting stability instead of importing instability (EurActiv, by Herbert Vytiska, translated by Alexandra Brzozowski, 30 July 2018)

The Commission is satisfied with its Western Balkans strategy, as it has triggered a new dynamic in the region. In an interview with EURACTIV Germany, Commissioner for Enlargement, Johannes Hahn, however, pleads for realism. Johannes Hahn is European Commissioner for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations since November 2014.

He spoke to EURACTIV Germany’s Herbert Vytiska.

Which Western Balkan countries made the most progress in the past year?   

First and foremost it is the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia which has overcome a deep political crisis by democratic means. The country has made considerable progress in implementing the Przino Agreement and reform priorities under the new, reform-oriented and pro-European government. Particularly noteworthy are the efforts of the government under Prime Minister Zaev for good neighbourly relations. After the friendship treaty with Bulgaria, finally after 27 years of futile efforts under UN mediation, the name dispute between Skopje and Athens has been settled. This historical agreement marks a significant step towards the realisation of the country’s Euro-Atlantic perspective.

However, the success of the agreement still requires a referendum, the outcome of which must be awaited.

I therefore call on all political actors to work constructively to achieve this goal and not to jeopardise the progress made due to party-political considerations. It is about the future of this country, therefore the referendum on the agreement with Greece and the new name should be carried out as soon as possible. The ratification and a successful referendum are essential steps on the way towards NATO- and EU-membership.

However, Albania, coming out of the shadows of its past, has also left observers pleasantly surprised.

The country has made good progress in implementing its reform priorities, especially when it comes to the very ambitious judicial reform. The government has also demonstrated unity in the fight against corruption and organised crime, whereas now it is about making condemnations of the masterminds. Albania, like the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, is working on agreements to resolve open border issues and is generally seeking good neighbourly relations. Due to the substantial progress made by both countries, the European Commission has recommended accession negotiations to be opened with Albania and Macedonia.

What about the progress of the other Western Balkan countries?

In general, it can be said that all countries have made progress over the past year, albeit at different speeds and intensities. Montenegro and Serbia, which are currently the “frontrunners” when looking at the opening of chapters, have opened more of them in the past year, and they now have 31 and 14 chapters respectively out of a total of 35. Kosovo has fulfilled the remaining conditions for granting visa liberalisation, so that we were able to make a positive recommendation. Bosnia and Herzegovina provided answers to the Commission’s extensive list of questions, which is a condition for granting the candidate status.

The enlargement strategy mentions a target date, namely the year 2025. Is it not too distant and daunting for the countries that want to join?

Not at all! This indicative date is not far away, because the reforms to adapt to EU standards take a long time, as it is not just about legislative changes, but also about their actual application. If one considers the necessary referenda and ratification procedures in some countries, one will recognise that this indicative date is very ambitious, but feasible. It is also necessary to consider that substance matters. Quality comes before speed!

There was scepticism in some member states in response to the Commission’s recommendation to open accession negotiations with Albania and Macedonia. How do you want to convince countries like France or the Netherlands that enlargement is important for the EU?

The expansion of the Western Balkans is more relevant than ever, especially in view of the increasing erosion of the rule-based world order. The Western Balkans are surrounded by EU member states and belong to Europe geographically, historically and culturally. It is in the best interests of the EU to ensure stability and prosperity in its immediate neighbourhood.

My principle for expansion is exporting stability rather than importing instability. In that sense, the EU integration of the Western Balkans is an investment in the security and stability of the union. Not to forget the geo-strategic aspect: it would be unwise and almost negligent to leave behind a vacuum that other international actors, whose values ​​do not agree with ours, make use of.

While there are positive developments in the Western Balkans, Turkey’s European orientation seems to be shrinking. After the recent election, Erdogan will put the country even further off the ground, and fundamental rights and freedoms are under heavy pressure.

We adapted our strategy towards Turkey to the situation in the country before the elections. All member states share the finding that in recent years Turkey has moved further and further away from the EU and its standards. That is why the member states have also confirmed at the last Council that the accession process has come to a standstill and for the time being no further chapters can be opened or closed. At my initiative, pre-accession payments have also been adjusted, that is, cut by several hundred million euros over the next few years.

Wouldn’t it be time for some realism when it comes to Turkey’s accession perspective?

In my view – and from the point of view of most Member States – meaning, it makes sense to continue the dialogue with Turkey. Because Turkey is and remains an important neighbour from a geostrategic perspective. Cooperation in areas of common interest makes perfect sense, as the refugee agreement shows, which works because both sides are upholding their commitments.

In the longer term, therefore, it may be useful to think of new formats beyond the accession negotiations, the conditions of which Turkey is unable or unwilling to fulfil.