LOCAL PRESS

Vucic: If we have an agreement, we will have more than today (RTS/Beta)

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said that he did not want to comment on concrete solutions for Kosovo and Metohija, because there were none yet, but added that Serbia had three basic goals – preserving peace, protecting state interests and protecting the rights of the Serb people. Vucic told RTS that the Serbian state’s first basic goal was to preserve peace and stability because that means a future for Serbian children. “It is better to keep the peace than make mistakes,” Vucic said, adding that the second hardest goal was to protect state interests. The third goal, he said, is to protect the rights of the Serb people in Kosovo and Metohija and their security. During his appearance Vucic announced that he would visit Kosovo and Metohija on Sept. 9 this year if everything is alright.  When asked to comment German Chancellor Angela Merklel’s statement that there would be no demarcation, Vucic said that he saw her as a true friend of the Serbian people. Commenting on the US stance on the question of initiating demarcation, he said that the U.S. and Germany had already demarcated Serbia. “They have demarcated us already and when they said that they are against [demarcation] that means that they are against borders harmful for us,” Vucic remarked.

Only directions, not solution on 9 September (N1)

President Vucic said on Friday he would only present the state policy directions concerning Kosovo to local Serbs there on 9 September, not a solution, since there wasn’t any, N1 reported.

He told reporters he would start working on his address “as of tomorrow” because he wanted that to be “valid in the next 50, 100 years, and not disappear in some elections or a television show.”

Vucic, who was visiting the leading medical institution in the country, Serbia’s Clinical Centre, added he would probably know more after meeting his Kosovo counterpart Hashim Thaci in Brussels and ahead of his trips to China and the US and the meeting with the Vice President of India in Belgrade. “I intend to tell people what they don’t want to hear, what is not easy to swallow,” he said, adding he wanted Serbia to be more successful in fulfilling its aims and in preserving peace and future by reaching a sustainable solution to the Kosovo issue. Asked to comment on Thaci’s statements about the annexation of Serbia’s southern region Presevo Valley, Vucic said that “they can say whatever they want in Pristina,” but that he would not react to that.

Vucic, Scott discuss dialogue, ideas for achieving solution (Tanjug/RTS/Beta)

Vucic had talks on Aug. 16 with US Ambassador Kyle Scott about the status of the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue and ideas for reaching a solution for the issue of Kosovo and Metohija, the president’s office has stated. Vucic said the need existed for reaching a true compromise, which would guarantee lasting stability and economic progress. The collocutors concurred that the dialogue is the way to improve the situation in Kosovo and Metohija, if it is approached responsibly and with avoiding confrontation, the statement reads. Scott urged Belgrade and Pristina to demonstrate courage, flexibility and creativity in reaching a solution which would contribute to regional stability.

Vulin: Spreading of Greater Albania must be stopped (Tanjug/Happy TV)

There is no free or sovereign country without a strong army, and our position in the talks on Kosovo and Metohija will be stronger the stronger our army gets, Serbian Defense Minister Aleksandar Vulin said Thursday, recalling that he had already made a loud and clear statement in favor of a delineation in Kosovo and Metohija. “I think the spreading of a Greater Albania – the most dangerous political idea in the Balkans – must be stopped. A Greater Albania means war – not only war with Serbia and Serbs, but also setting Montenegro, Macedonia, and perhaps Greece, but definitely Serbia, ablaze,” he said in an appearance on Happy TV.

EC: Belgrade and Pristina set topics for dialogue (Beta)

Belgrade and Pristina set the topics within the dialogue, while the EU is only mediating, the spokesman of the European Commission (EC), Carlos Martin, stated in Brussels on Aug. 16.

It is up to the two sides to set the agenda, our role is to mediate in the dialogue, Martin replied to a question about whether the demarcation of the border could be a topic of the talks in September, or if EU High Representative Federica Mogherini had completely excluded that as an option. He added that the president of the Serbia and Kosovo, Aleksandar Vucic and Hashim Thaci, agreed to intensify the dialogue and meet in September. The EU-mediated dialogue has the purpose of inciting lasting cooperation between the two sides, to help them make progress on the path to Europe and improve the life of their population. A lasting solution means a possible, sustainable and realistic solution, in keeping with international law. The sides should define a joint stand on a mutual agreement, stated the Commission’s spokesman.

Dodik: We will write new, truthful Srebrenica report in two months (Tanjug)

Republika Srpska (RS) President Milorad Dodik has said that we will start writing a new, truthful report on crimes in Srebrenica in two months. “At its first next session, the RS government should set a 60-day deadline for the formation of an international commission which would write a new report on Srebrenica, and it will immediately seek a way to secure funds to finance the most distinguished world experts who would take part in writing the truthful report on crimes in Srebrenica,” Dodik told Tanjug. Saying that the RS parliament has rejected the report on the events in and around Srebrenica in the period July 10-19, 1995, Dodik has explained that the motive for this is an “attempted ‘cold’ persecution of another 21,000 Serbs” who are on the list, which is not objective at all and which the Mothers of Srebrenica Association sent to the German state prosecutor. He says that the report is now null and void, that both the ruling and opposition parties voted that it is unacceptable and full of untruths.

REGIONAL PRESS

Dodik: US State Department should have critical attitude towards misinformation coming from US Embassy in Sarajevo (TV1/N1/RTRS)

RS President Milorad Dodik stated on Thursday that the US State Department still does not have a critical attitude towards the “misinformation” coming from the US Embassy in Sarajevo, adding that it is about time to put an end to such practice. He stressed that the RS parliament is not trying to revise facts, explaining that facts have never been established in the first place. “Nobody wants to deny the facts of what happened, but to confirm them as part of a comprehensive analysis of the truth about what happened in Srebrenica. It is especially important to emphasize that the decision ordering the FB&H government to prepare a report on the killings of Serbs during the war has never been implemented,” Dodik argued. “Finding out of the whole truth is the best interest of Serbs as well. But, the imposed truth, that existed for the past fourteen years, serves no one,” said Dodik.

ICMP condemns RS parliament’s decision to reject 2004 report (Al Jazeera Balkans)

The International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) issued a statement in reaction to Tuesday’s special session of the RS parliament. The ICMP assessed that the RS parliament’s rejection of the 2004 report on Srebrenica events represents undermining of reconciliation and rule of law. The statement reads that the facts from the report have been confirmed by domestic and international courts and these facts are less disputable today than it was the case in 2004. The ICMP reminded that this commission is working on identification of victims from Srebrenica and Zepa using DNA analysis since 2001. It was also emphasized that disappearance of 8,000 persons was reported in Srebrenica in 1995 and mortal remains of 6,940 have been identified by June of this year.

Operational HQ for Migration Issues in B&H accepts FUP’s assistance in strengthening of border control (N1)

The Operational Headquarters (HQ) for Migration Issues in B&H held a session on Thursday in Sarajevo. The main conclusion of the session was that B&H will continue strengthening its border control with an aim to prevent illegal migrants from crossing the country’s borders. The Operational HQ concluded that the pressure on the eastern B&H’s border is increasing, but that the backup provided by other law enforcement agencies to the Border Police of B&H has already resulted in a significant number of prevented illegal migrants’ entries. Members of the FB&H Police Administration (FUP) offered their help to Border Police of B&H in controlling the border and FUP members will soon be dispatched were they are most needed.

B&H CoM approves BAM 460,000 for costs of additional engagement of police officers to control border of B&H (TV1)

The B&H Council of Ministers (CoM) held an extraordinary telephone session on Thursday and decided to approve around BAM 460,000 of budget funds for the B&H Border Police, the B&H Directorate for Coordination of Police Bodies and the State Investigation and Protection Agency (SIPA) to make up for travel, accommodation and food expenses as a consequence of additional engagement of police officers to control the border of B&H.

Up to 3,000 unregistered migrants in Loznica, Serbia, waiting for right moment to enter B&H (TV1)

According to operational data of police agencies in B&H, there are 2,000 to 3,000 unregistered migrants in Loznica, Serbia, where they are waiting for the right moment to cross the border and enter B&H – mostly across the Drina River. In order to cross the river, they often use inflatable boats they buy from local salesmen in Serbia. In case they manage to cross to the territory of B&H, cornfields on the other side make it more difficult for border police officers to find them. Commander of the Border Police in Zvornik Mirel Imamovic stated that migrants exchange their information and use information technologies, including GPS satellites, maps etc. “We are trying to adjust, we are changing the position of our patrols. (…) Most of the migrants come from Iran and Pakistan,” he added.

Chief of IOM Mission to B&H Peter Van der Auweraert comments allegations about misconduct of Croatian police towards migrants (N1)

Migrants who are currently residing in B&H are constantly trying to cross the border with Croatia, in order to continue their journey to the western EU countries. During their attempts, many of them were mistreated by the Croatian police and sent back to B&H. According to the stories told by the migrants, the Croatian police officers beat them, confiscate their belongings and money, take away or break their phones, before returning them to B&H police. Chief of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) Mission to B&H Peter Van der Auweraert commented these allegations for N1, saying that IOM members saw the injuries that migrants sustained, but without further investigation, it is not possible to determine what caused them. Auweraert said that migrants show IOM members their injuries and photos made on the border crossing with Croatia, but he emphasized that IOM does not have the necessary capacities to independently investigate whether the Croatian police officers had anything to do with these injuries, or not. “We also know that there have been cases of reported violence between the migrants. We could see that in Velika Kladusa. If someone shows me an injury, it is difficult to judge anything, before conducting a proper investigation,” said Auweraert. Migrants that are currently residing in B&H are constantly trying to cross the border with Croatia, in order to continue their journey to the western EU countries. During their attempts, many of them were mistreated by the Croatian police and sent back to B&H. According to the stories told by the migrants, the Croatian police officers beat them, confiscate their belongings and money, take away or break their phones, before returning them to B&H police. According to the migrants’ testimonies, the Croatian police is engaged in a systematic campaign of violence and theft against migrants and refugees who are attempting to find a route to western Europe through Croatia. N1 spoke with some of the migrants currently residing in camps across the Una-Sana Canton (USC), who told their stories about their encounters with the Croatian police. According to N1, the Croatian Ministry of Interior (MoI) did not wish to give any official statement to these claims.

Montenegro is preparing for the inflow of migrants (CDM)

Migrant crisis and the role of Montenegro in responding to it will probably be one of the main topics of conversation between our Prime Minister, Dusko Markovic and German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, which will take place in Berlin. After this meeting, some more specific requests of the EU and Germany when it comes to migrants should be known. Also, we will find out whether Europe is ready to support small Montenegro which is in delicate position as being the transit route for migrants. New wave of migrants is to be expected in fall already. Ministry of Defense confirmed that it is necessary to protect the border from migrants. Army of Montenegro started protecting border with Albania yesterday and they are also going to be engaged in the control of borderlands and in the zone of border crossing Bozaj. Prime Minister recently conveyed a clear message in relation to the migrant crisis. “In case of their huge inflow in our country, we planned to rehabilitate a watchtower where they could stay”, said Markovic but the pointed out that Montenegro will not serve as a shelter for migrants. Closing the borders of the EU countries redirected the migrants and now they are looking for salvation in the EU but going across countries of the Western Balkans. One of the proposed solutions for solving this problem was opening shelters in the countries of Western Balkans and one of the countries where such a shelter would be open is our neighbor, Albania. Hungarian Prime minister, Viktor Orban, donated 25 km of barbed wire to Montenegro since it’s obvious that the country must be prepared.

Bosnia is strengthening the border control

Migrants don’t want to stay in Montenegro. For them it’s just a transit country. Their ultimate goal is the EU Member, Croatia. However, Croatia closed the borders and now they are forced to stay in Bosnia or to come back to Montenegro. Bosnia and Herzegovina is fighting fierce battle with migrants. According to the media, pressure on the eastern part of the border is becoming greater but, luckily, the Police in Bosnia is getting support from the State Investigation and Protection Agency and the police of Republika Srpska.

Croatian police beats migrants

The Guardian has reported recently that Croatian police uses violence against migrants and refugees who enter Croatia from Bosnia and Herzegovina and try to reach West Europe.

Not only are they beaten but they also end up being robbed and, in best case, with broken phones. Once the police catch the migrants, they take them back to the border by night and take them back to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

EC gave 90.000 EUR

European Commission provided 90.000 EUR for humanitarian purposes as a response to the increase in number of refugees. More than 2.000 individuals will benefit from this.

So, to sum things up: the situation really is delicate. We have to be human but we must not let this get out of control.

Bugajski: Changing borders will stir up the Balkans (Pobjeda)

After several provocative statements made by Serbian and politicians from Kosovo, with only the silence of Washington and Brussels, assumptions that territorial exchange between Belgrade and Pristina is being planned are widespread. However, American political analyst, Janusz Bugajski, thinks that would be a very dangerous thing in such an unstable region. “There are hints that Washington and Brussels could request that Serbia- Kosovo dispute be settled through territorial options and that’s why they instigated this test balloon, in order to see what kind of an agreement can be reached between Belgrade and Priština, without direct international mediation. Changing borders in Western Balkans is dangerous and can be interpreted as legitimization of national homogenization. NATO forces and European institutions won’t be ready for the wave of instability that can spread on to the region. Radicalized Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo might provoke violent protests in order to expel other nationalities from their territories. And such scenario might extend to Macedonia,” says Bugajski. He adds: “Only sovereign states can exchange a territory. Serbia and Kosovo should recognize one another as independent countries and they shouldn’t block entrance into international institutions,” concluded Bugajski.

Dimitrov to launch campaign for informing citizens about Skopje-Athens deal, upcoming referendum (MIA)

A campaign, dubbed ‘Ask the Minister’, will be launched next week to inform citizens about Macedonia-Greece agreement and the upcoming referendum, Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov said in an interview with 24 News TV. During the campaign, the Foreign Minister will answer to citizens’ questions via social media once a week, namely every Thursday. It is very important for the citizens to get familiar with the basic elements and benefits of the agreement with Greece, Dimitrov said. He appealed to citizens to read the document, which is available on the government website (www.vlada.mk). The polls, he added, show that a small number of citizens are aware of the document’s content. ‘It is my duty, as a signatory of the agreement, to do my best to inform the citizens about the document, as we (Macedonia) are on a historic crossroad. A lot is at stake, we have to make a very significant decision – where we wish Macedonia to be in the upcoming period,’ Dimitrov said. For me, he said, the support of this agreement is a national and obligation of the present generation for strengthening the state and its identity. He also notified that it would be difficult for Macedonia to survive without being part of the European Union and NATO. In this respect Dimitrov notified the recent ideas of Macedonia’s northern neighbors about borders redrawing. Dimitrov reiterated some of the agreement’s main points, namely that the country’s name will be the Republic of North Macedonia, which requires constitutional amendments; the citizenship shall be Macedonian/citizens of the Republic North Macedonia, while the national anthem and Macedonian language remain unchanged. Commenting the differences between ruling and opposition VMRO-DPMNE party over the agreement, Dimitrov said that it was not a matter of political parties or the government, but a vital issue for the future of the country, its accession to NATO, EU, for keeping the young people at home. VMRO-DPMNE leader Hristijan Mickoski is entitled to own opinion about the agreement, but one cannot voice support for EU and NATO membership and at the same time refute the agreement, Dimitrov said. Citizens should decide if they wish for Macedonia to move forward or go back to the waiting room, Dimitrov said, inviting them to come out and cast their vote in the upcoming referendum. ‘To boycott own future, own state, our Macedonia is an act of cowardice,’ Dimitrov said.

INTERNATIONAL MEDIA SOURCES

A land swap between Kosovo and Serbia would be deeply problematic – and potentially dangerous (London School of Economics, by Michael Rossi, 17 August 2018)

There has been speculation in recent weeks that the leaders of Kosovo and Serbia have explored the option of a land swap, with some predominantly ethnic-Albanian areas of Serbia being traded for Serbian majority areas in Kosovo. Michael Rossi argues that an exchange of territory would do little for the Serbian or Albanian communities involved and could pose a threat to the stability of the region.

The increased chatter around normalising relations between Serbia and Kosovo has seemed to once again revisit the taboo topic of partitioning the territory, even though all participating sides have officially dismissed such ideas in the past. More recently – and more ominously – there has been talk of a potential “land swap” that would exchange the Serb-inhabited area of northern Kosovo with the Albanian-inhabited Preševo Valley as some sort of “compromise” between presidents Aleksandar Vučić and Hashim Thaçi. Again, all of this appears to be little more than gossip for the time being, but even rumours are enough to raise tensions in an already tense region.

Moreover, with international observers opining this month on the potential dangers of border changes, one would think those people in charge would issue some sort of statement to put these rumours to rest. Unfortunately talks of partition only seem to be intensifying. In the last few days, Serbian President Vučić has advocated for some sort of “delimitation” with Kosovo. Whatever that means currently remains a mystery, as Vučić is prone to keeping vaguely-worded statements a secret for his own ends. Whether it is, as Daniel Serwer observed, a euphemism for “partition”, or simply a “correction” of borders that exchanges a few villages here for a few there, as Wolfgang Petritsch tried to clarify, is unclear. Along these lines, Kosovo President Thaçi has openly dismissed talks of “partition” yet still somehow envisions the Preševo Valley merging with Kosovo in a final settlement with Serbia.

How this will work is something only Thaçi seems to know. Additionally, from what we know of border “corrections” and “demarcations” Kosovo has made with Montenegro, the subject is highly controversial for political hardliners who have openly disrupted parliamentary sessions with tear gas to prevent discussion of Kosovo giving up any of its territory.

All of this has unleashed a series of reactions in the Serbian and Kosovan press trying to figure out what deals, if any, were made behind closed doors in Brussels between Vučić and Thaçi. That Kosovo has failed in forming the Assembly of Serbian Municipalities (ZSO) that has been so crucial to the 2013 Brussels Agreement may be reason for Vučić to conclude progress is at a standstill and alternative options need to be considered. If talks of a land swap with Thaçi have happened, this does Pristina a huge favour since it not only alleviates them from the responsibility of forming ZSO, but it relieves them of having to worry about a contentious north that has never come under Pristina’s control.

Whatever the reason, it has left Serbs in Kosovo visibly and vocally shaken as to a future they seem to have no input in. The Serbian Orthodox Church in Kosovo has adamantly proclaimed any and all opposition to partition that would leave more than sixty percent of its people south of the Ibar River (the assumed dividing line) in a rump Kosovo that would ostensibly include an additional thirty to forty thousand ethnic Albanians from the Preševo Valley. The internationally respected Abbot of Visoki Dečani Monastery, Sava Janjić, has become a one-man advocate on social media in highlighting the fears and uncertainties he and his flock seem to face from Belgrade apparently abandoning them to an unknown fate – an ironic decision considering the parts of Kosovo that actually matter to Serbian cultural, historical, and religious identity are almost all in the part of the territory Belgrade would write off if partition were accepted. In a seemingly surreal event, officials in Belgrade are even castigating him and the Church, the very symbols of Serbia’s presence in Kosovo, for being recalcitrant to government ideas.

Among ethnic Albanians, Hashim Thaçi is risking becoming persona non grata within political and journalistic circles for apparently making a deal that would shear off northern Kosovo, and with it, any hopes of ever attaining control of two critically important industrial assets for Kosovo’s weak economy: the Trepča Mining complex, and the Gazivode dam and hydroelectric plant. Both were already feared of being monopolised by Kosovo Serbs in any arrangement that creates ZSO, but with a formal partition, the territory would effectively be lost to another state.

To add to the uncertainties, Russia has recently announced its willingness to support whatever agreement Serbia reaches with Kosovo, under the blanket statement that it has always supported Belgrade’s decision regarding its own territory. In short, partition, which has always been an option denied by international actors, now seems to be considered a viable alternative to an intractable frozen conflict between Serbia and a disputed territory. If such an agreement includes Serbia’s recognition of Kosovo and its subsequent entry in the United Nations as a de jure state, the fate of a few ten thousand Serbs in Kosovo may seem like a small price to pay for a definitive peace.

The problem, as many have already opined, is that partition (or land swap, delineation, delimitation, border correction, or whatever synonym is used) is both problematic and dangerous, and should be resolutely rejected by all concerned international actors. Along with the risks it carries in opening the proverbial “Pandora’s Box” for at least a dozen similar breakaway entities, there are key issues concerning the stability of both Kosovo and Serbia.

The problems with partition

First, partition does nothing to benefit the Serb-inhabited regions of northern Kosovo. The assumption among many is that northern Kosovo remains the last major foothold Belgrade has in the region. This is not entirely true as the lack of any central authority in nearly two decades has created a unique set of powerbrokers that include political strongmen and organised crime heads that effectively run the region. They may defer to Belgrade, but they control the day-to-day operations and have amassed sufficient wealth and prestige to be their own voices and decision-makers in Kosovo’s future.

Thus to reabsorb them into Serbia proper risks a highly likely power struggle between Belgrade attempting to reassert control, and the powers that have run the region as their own fiefdom since at least 2008. Within Kosovo, the region receives disproportionate international attention that includes both political and economic investment. Within Serbia, the region would leave international attention, with North Mitrovica, a city itself divided at the Ibar, becoming just another run-down neglected border town. Whatever privileges the north has been receiving would most likely be lost.

Second, a hypothetical land swap equally does nothing for the Albanian-populated regions of Preševo. Calls among hardliners in Pristina to annex what is sometimes referred to as “Eastern Kosovo” are rarely, if ever, echoed by Albanian officials in Preševo who, like their Serb counterparts in northern Kosovo, enjoy a special status as a mobilised minority that can use its leverage to extract concessions from the political centre under threat of ethnic unrest. If they merged with Kosovo, these advantages would disappear as they would no doubt be forced to be subordinate to another set of political elites and factions in Pristina, where rival groups jockeying for power already make politics a contentious profession.

Beyond that, it is still unclear whether any solution reached with Serbia will guarantee Kosovo’s status as an internationally sovereign state. Currently, Serbia is under no real pressure to extend formal recognition, which is also opposed by a number of states in both the European Union and the United Nations. Thus, if any compromise reached leaves out the critically important requirement of recognition, which it very well might, it does Preševo Albanians no good to go from being citizens of an internationally recognised country to joining a disputed territory with no hope of gaining constitutive sovereignty.

Third, partition critically endangers any future for Serbian communities or cultural heritage in central and southern Kosovo. Serbs south of the Ibar are scattered in a series of disjointed villages and municipalities; the largest being the town of Gračanica, which numbers just over ten thousand Serbs, and prior to 1999 served as little more than a village suburb of Pristina. Any partition or land swap severely reduces their presence and political voice without the North serving as an urban stronghold. With the thought of being abandoned by Belgrade, and with the possibility of Pristina being even less inclined to offer them any form of political autonomy than they are now, most Serbs would feel compelled to leave. What remained would be little more than an ethnographic novelty, useful only insofar as it would allow international officials to visit the region and convince themselves that Kosovo remained a multiethnic state.

Fourth, partition undermines years of dedicated efforts by the international community to find a lasting solution. Kosovo was envisioned by its sponsors to be multiethnic. This has been repeatedly encapsulated in documents like the Ahtisaari Plan and the Brussels Agreement which empower the Serb communities to a degree where they feel safe and secure enough to live ostensibly in another country.

What tends to be lost in the narrative is that Albanians always considered multiethnic consociationalism a price to be paid in exchange for international assistance for their own long-sought self-determination. It is usually forgotten that while Kosovo’s separation from Serbia may have been predicated on conflict in 1999, that conflict stems from a longstanding desire by its ethnic Albanian community to boycott participation in all Yugoslav associations in order to eventually separate and unite with Albania as far back as 1990. Albanians never envisioned a Kosovo under their control to be anything other than Albanian. Serbs, Serbian heritage, and Serbian claims to the territory were all disregarded in Albanian historical memory.

Thus, while opponents of Kosovo’s statehood blame Western powers for enabling and empowering erstwhile separatists, it is the very same Western powers that took an active role in redesigning Kosovo to be as inclusive of Serbs and other non-Albanian communities as possible. In other words, independence, which Albanians long desired, would be designed, structured, administered, and defined as an international initiative that would be considerably different from what Albanians actually envisioned. Partition effectively nullifies all of this, upends all international agreements, and gives credence to those not just in Kosovo but in Bosnia and Macedonia who advocate pan-ethnic states.

The issue here is that any partition or land swap effectively draws new borders which the international community has been loath to do. Since 1945, the creation of new states out of existing ones has traditionally respected the principle of uti possidetis, which recognises new international boundaries from the borders of preexisting colonial or constituent federal republic units. Leaving to one side the debate over whether Kosovo’s statehood qualifies as meeting this principle since it was a territory and not a federal unit within Yugoslavia, proponents of its independence view its borders to be those it had as an autonomous province of Serbia. Drawing a new line at the Ibar River and incorporating the Preševo Valley is something completely unprecedented in international law in the modern age.

A threat to stability

Currently, we neither know what Vučić’s plan for “delimitation” is, nor do we know whether any such arrangement will be agreed upon with Kosovo and the international community. What we do know is that such talk risks destabilising an already volatile region that includes Macedonia and Bosnia where groups eager to redraw borders would be quick to capitalise on a new precedent being set. We also know that the United States has again repeated its opposition to any exchange of territories, though its influence in the region is no longer as decisive as what it once was. Finally, a number of NGOs in both Serbia and Kosovo – Serbian and Albanian – have issued a rare joint letter to EU High Representative Frederica Mogherini petitioning her to make an unambiguous statement against either Kosovo’s division or any exchange of territories.

All of this should be a welcome sign that rumours of partition may remain just that. If all of this is simply a way for Belgrade to get the international community to increase pressure on Pristina to implement parts of the Brussels Agreement that establishes ZSO, or even as a way to simply test the limits of their diplomatic leverage, it is a dangerous game to play. The same applies to Kosovo where years of stalling on creating ZSO has tested the patience of Pristina’s closest supporters. To suddenly scuttle this arrangement in favour of a territorial swap is irresponsible.

Neither partition nor a land swap will benefit anyone involved in Kosovo’s final status. “Velvet divorces” and “negotiated” territorial adjustments are not part of the region’s history and calls to redraw borders and possibly trade territory would almost certainly degenerate into violence and chaotic population exchanges. If groups as disparate as the Kosovo Women’s Network, the Helsinki Commission for Human Rights in Serbia, and the Serbian Orthodox Church all agree on opposing this issue, it is an issue worth opposing.

Note: This article gives the views of the author, not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics.

Michael Rossi – Rutgers University
Michael Rossi is Instructor in the Department of Political Science at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, and Visiting Instructor in the Department of Political Science at Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York City. He is currently working with Jaume Castan Pinos (University of Southern Denmark) in an emerging comparative study on parastates around the world.