LOCAL PRESS

 

Dacic: Important day for Serbs, but not fateful (RTS)

Serbian Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic has told the morning news of Radio and Television of Serbia that the sixth and final version of the British resolution on Srebrenica is the only official version and that it will be debated at the United Nations Security Council session at 4pm, central-European time. “The voting is expected to take place today, although it might be postponed for some other day,” said Minister Dacic. He points out that Serbia has not been invited to take part in today’s session. “We have objections and we consider that Britain has not played a positive role in all this,” says Dacic. He says that this is an important day for the Serb people but not a fateful one. “There are three possibilities: for the resolution to be accepted today, for it to be rejected or for the voting to take place some other day,” explains Dacic. However, he says he cannot present his expectations publicly for diplomatic reasons. “We expect everyone to be aware of the consequences if the resolution is adopted. Serbia must not triumph if the resolution is not adopted, but it should neither mourn its fate if it is adopted. We must go on, only Serbia that defends its national interests can be respected,” points out Dacic. He says that Serbia will be happy if the goal of this resolution is reconciliation, but adds that the very draft resolution cannot contribute to reconciliation. “If the goal of this is to create a precondition for abolishing the Republika Srpska (RS) I must remind that Serbia is the guarantor of the Dayton Accord and if someone thinks this will pass easily, let me warn, Serbia will stand on the RS side,” says Dacic. “Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic wrote to all heads of states of the permanent UN Security Council members. When he wrote to the British Queen, he also wrote to the Spanish King,” said Dacic.

 

MPs support cooperation with NATO (RTS)

Serbian MPs are discussing the adoption of an agreement of NATO member states and other countries participating in the Partnership for Peace Program on the status of their forces, with accompanying protocols. As for Serbia’s cooperation with NATO within the Partnership for Peace Program, the Serbian parliament has reached broad consensus. While presenting the agreement, Defense Minister Bratislav Gasic explained that the signing of the agreement does not imply Serbia’s NATO membership as Serbia remains a military neutral country. The Minister noted that the implementation of the agreement enables unhindered military cooperation, particularly in terms of preparations and the functioning of the army in peace-keeping missions. Previous experience shows that this agreement allows optimal extent of cooperation with NATO aimed at supporting defense reform, the Minister said. The signing of the agreement has been supported by all political groups, noting that cooperation, and for some even NATO accession, represent good steps on Serbia’s path towards the EU, and this particular agreement contributes to the reputation of our forces in the world. Democratic Party MP and former Defense minister Dragan Sutanovac said that this agreement is good because it builds the operational capacity of the Serbian Army. “All these young officers have the opportunity to practice with NATO forces, and participate in peacekeeping missions around the world. Upon their return, they will have more experience and might be involved in more serious matters in terms of national defense.” It was mentioned that when it comes to NATO, emotions of the citizens remain negative due to the recent memories of the 1999 aggression, but also that awareness is on the rise that Serbia should develop friendly relations with major powers. The agreement drafted in 1995 was signed by 28 NATO member states and 14 countries that have joined the Partnership for Peace, including Russia.

 

Figluiolo: We will preserve peace in the north (Novosti)

“The situation in Kosovo is peaceful and stable and it is improving every day thanks to the resoluteness of KFOR and all Kosovo security organizations. However, there are still unpredictable situations that can emerge over the fragile nature of inter-ethnic relations,” KFOR Commander, Italian Major General Francesco Paolo Figliuolo tells Novosti.

Can safety be guaranteed in northern Kosovo and Metohija?

“We are capable of ensuring safety in northern Kosovo in coordination with the Kosovo Police and EULEX. KFOR has about five thousand soldiers in Kosovo who can quickly deploy throughout the entire territory.”

What are the estimates of the situation around the bridge on the Ibar River?

“The security situation in this part of Mitrovica is peaceful at present. KFOR and the Kosovo Police are present on the bridge. We are always prepared to prevent eventual escalation of tensions and to intervene, if necessary.”

Serbs still do not have enough freedom of movement, especially in isolated and remote regions in Kosovo…

“This is a specific aspect of our mission that has been positively implemented and we will continue to ensure freedom of movement for all people in Kosovo.”

Yet, the returnees in the municipalities of Istok and Klina are almost daily targeted by Albanian robbers.

“We are aware that there had been some criminal incidents in the municipalities of Istok and Klina. KFOR pays great attention to incidents that may lead to inter-ethnic problems and it is in constant contact with local representatives so it can understand better the problems.”

Are the Orthodox sanctities in Kosovo and Metohija sufficiently protected?

“Since I assumed command over KFOR I haven’t seen some greater attack on Orthodox monasteries and churches. The Kosovo Police, together with KFOR, is presently securing Serbian Orthodox churches, and KFOR is directly responsible for security only in the Visoki Decani Monastery. My estimate is that all security organizations in Kosovo are effective in providing adequate safety to all religious facilities.”

Is it true that the Albanians have KFOR’s support for the transformation of the so-called security forces into the “army of Kosovo”?

“KFOR didn’t make any statements on this topic. The evolution of Kosovo security forces is a political process.”

 

REGIONAL PRESS

 

Prosecution says Dodik’s denial of genocide is a criminal offense (Dnevni avaz)

The Prosecution of the Federation of B&H has concluded there are “elements of a criminal offense” in the statements made by the RS President Milorad Dodik in which he denied genocide in Srebrenica. Prosecution concluded there are elements of offense of inciting national, racial and religious hatred, discord or intolerance, under the Article 163 of the FB&H Criminal Code, reports Dnevni avaz. Prosecution made this conclusion on the criminal complaint submitted by Association of victims and witnesses of genocide. At the same time, Prosecution of this B&H entity said that competent institution in this case is state level Prosecution, to which it has forwarded the criminal complaint. Association said in the complaint that Dodik has denied genocide in Srebrenica publicly many times, and minimized the number of victims. “We believe that public denial of the Srebrenica genocide could cause discord and intolerance between Bosniaks and Serbs as constituent peoples in the whole area of B&H”, the FB&H Prosecution stated in the letter to the Association. B&H Prosecution said that it received complaint and letter from FB&H Prosecution. “We will review the material and make decision whether this case is competence of state, or entity Prosecution”, said B&H Prosecution.

 

Service held in UK to remember Srebrenica massacre victims (Nezavisne)

Days before the 20th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, hundreds of Bosnians and Britons attended a memorial service at Westminster Abbey on Monday to remember the more than 8,000 male Muslim victims. The service was one of dozens of events in Britain this week to mark 20 years since the July 11-13, 1995 massacre – Europe’s worst mass killing since World War II.

Bosnian Serbs rounded up men and boys in Srebrenica after taking control of the town, killing most of the victims and buried their bodies in mass graves. “We must never, ever forget what happened at Srebrenica,” British Prime Minister David Cameron said in tributes before the service. “We must reaffirm our determination to act to prevent genocide in the future.” The Westminster Abbey service was attended by Bakir Izetbegovic, the Bosniak member of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s (B&H) presidency. Member of the B&H Presidency Bakir Izetbegovic met with the British Prime Minister David Cameron in London today. During Izetbegovic’s meeting with Cameron, it was assessed that the bilateral relations between the two countries are very good, with no outstanding issues, with a prospect of further improvement. Izetbegovic expressed his gratitude to the UK for assistance to Bosnia and Herzegovina, for its role in the ongoing British-German initiative and for the proposal of resolution on the Srebrenica genocide. Cameron expressed his satisfaction with the visit of B&H Presidency member. He expressed his support for B&H on its path towards the European Union and reaffirmed the readiness of the United Kingdom to help the country to accelerate that path, convinced that the British-German initiative will encourage significant steps in that direction. The interlocutors expressed confidence that the draft resolution on Srebrenica will be adopted at the UN.

 

INTERNATIONAL PRESS

 

Serbia Presses Russia to Veto Srebrenica Massacre Resolution (AP, 7 July 2015)

UNITED NATIONS — Serbia is pressing Russia to use its veto Tuesday against a British-drafted resolution marking the 20th anniversary of the 1995 massacre of some 8,000 Muslim men and boys at Srebrenica during the Bosnian war which condemns the killings as a crime of genocide. Serbian state TV said Saturday that the country's pro-Russian President Tomislav Nikolic had sent a letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin "pleading" for a Russian "no" vote. Supporters of the resolution had been hoping for unanimous approval by the U.N. Security Council, but that appears unlikely. Whether Russia uses its veto or abstains in the vote remains to be seen. Russia, which has close cultural and religious ties to Serbia, circulated a rival draft resolution which doesn't mention either Srebrenica or genocide but no vote has been scheduled on it. Last week, Russia's deputy U.N. ambassador Petr Iliichev called the British draft "divisive," saying the Russian draft is "more general, more reconciling." Serbia's Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic wrote to the council on June 28 calling the British draft "unbalanced," ''unnecessary and detrimental," and harmful to the fragile reconciliation process in Bosnia. Britain's U.N. Ambassador Matthew Rycroft stressed in a July 2 letter to Mladen Ivanic, the Serb member and current chair of Bosnia's tripartite presidency, that the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia in 2004 and the International Court of Justice in 2007 both determined that the mass killings at Srebrenica were an act of genocide. "That is not a political statement. It is a legal fact," Rycroft wrote. "What happened in Srebrenica was the worst single crime in Europe since the Second World War." He stressed that any judgment of genocide deal with individuals — not an entire people — and he insisted that the resolution is not "anti-Serbian" as some have alleged.

 

Bosnia paralysed by identity crisis 20 years after genocide (The Irish Times, by Dan McLaughlin, 7 July 2015)

As Bosnia marks 20 years since members of one community slaughtered civilians from another and dumped them in mass graves, a stark question hangs over the country: what does it mean to be Bosnian? Saturday’s commemoration of the Srebrenica genocide, when Bosnian Serb troops murdered more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys, will do nothing to unify a country still shaped and divided by its 1992-1995 war. Bosnian Serbs and Serbia are now seeking to block a British draft UN resolution on Srebrenica, which they say ignores atrocities committed against Serbs during a war that claimed 100,000 lives. Last Saturday, Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik visited Bratunac, a town near Srebrenica where Muslims were executed and buried 20 years ago, and again questioned the nature and scale of the massacre. “The goal is to register at the UN, on the basis of false declarations and reports, that a genocide was committed against Muslims,” Dodik said at a commemoration event for 3,500 Bosnian Serbs killed in the region during the war. “Everything is a recurrent lie. We are told ‘You should not deny.’ How not to deny a lie? You are the ones who are not telling the truth. Where are the 8,300 [murdered] men? Why do you lie?” Dignitaries from around the world will attend a memorial ceremony on Saturday at a cemetery where 6,200 Srebrenica victims are buried, and at least 115 newly identified bodies will be interred; about 7,000 people are still missing since the war.

Worst massacre

Bosnia does not have an official day of commemoration, however, because Bosnian Serb politicians have blocked efforts to formally mark Europe’s worst massacre since the second World War. Bosnia’s war left an indelible mark on its Muslims, who are known as Bosniaks: they made up about three-quarters of the 40,000 civilians killed in the conflict, and tens of thousands of Bosniak women were raped. Serbs perpetrated the vast majority of this violence but, while admitting that some Serb fighters committed grave crimes, Bosnian Serb and Serbian leaders also complain that the West demonises their people over the bloody fall of Yugoslavia.

Ethnic violence and revenge attacks are now remarkably rare in Bosnia, but clashing ideas about history and justice constantly undermine efforts to unify the country. These divisions were entrenched by a peace deal that split Bosnia into a Muslim-Croat Federation and a Serb-run Republika Srpska, autonomous “entities” linked by weak state institutions in the national capital, Sarajevo. The pact deemed Muslim Bosniaks, Orthodox Christian Serbs and Catholic Croats to be Bosnia’s “constituent peoples”, who would share power and dole out state jobs via quotas; only people from those ethnic groups can hold senior state posts. Two decades on, however, this fiendishly complex, opaque and bureaucratic system is still operating according to data from 1991 – before a war that temporarily displaced two million people and prompted many to leave Bosnia forever.

National census

With the support of the European Union, Bosnia sought to take a long overdue new “snapshot” of its population with a national census in 2013. “A census should be a technical project but here – as with many things – it’s very political,” said Dalio Sijah of civil society group Zasto Ne? (“Why Not?”). Ahead of the census, Zasto Ne? called on Bosnians to reject the labels of Bosniak, Serb or Croat and declare themselves as “others”, in a bid to break the entrenched ethno-political system and the culture of party patronage that it fosters. Thousands supported the campaign, posting pictures of themselves online holding signs saying “Ethnically challenged”, “Constitutionally challenged” and “A citizen above all”. The 1991 census showed that 4.4 million resided in Bosnia. Almost 43 per cent were Muslims, 31 per cent were Serbs and 17 per cent Croats, and most lived in ethnically mixed areas. The 2013 survey discovered that Bosnia’s population had shrunk to 3.8 million – but sensitive data on the ethnic composition of the country is yet to be disclosed. “We still don’t have official results and have no idea when they’ll be released . . . The law on census was vague and badly defined, and there was lots of ‘we’ll figure that out afterwards’. “Well, they’re still figuring it out,” said Sijah. “Republika Srpska won’t recognise the results because Bosniaks living abroad came back for the census, and Bosniaks say that not to allow them back would entrench the results of ethnic cleansing by Serbs.” Bosnia’s fault lines trace opinions not only about the war, but about the country’s political and economic future. Most Muslims and Croats want Bosnia to join the EU, but many Bosnian Serbs favour ties with Russia and are deeply suspicious of Brussels’s push to strengthen Bosnia’s unity by reducing the autonomy of its two “entities”. Dodik visited Russia last month, and hopes that country will block the UN draft resolution on Srebrenica; last week, anti-EU posters bearing a picture of president Vladimir Putin appeared in Serb villages around Srebrenica, including some on the bullet-scarred walls of an infamous warehouse where Bosniaks were executed.

Rupture by resolution

On Sunday, Dodik again threatened to push for Republika Srpska’s independence and said the disputed UN resolution could tear Bosnia apart. “Why does the world let the Serbs block the functioning of this country?” Camil Durakovic, Srebrenica’s Bosniak mayor, asked in a recent interview. “Why don’t we work together – Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks – to make our Bosnia a success? “The world should remember that Serbs and Croats have a homeland just next door, in Serbia and Croatia. But we don’t have that – all we have is Bosnia.”

 

Grexit Could Destabilize Balkan Region – Belgian Foreign Minister (Sputnik, 7 July 2015)

Greece's Gordian Knot: Syriza Tackles Austerity

Grexit, if occurs, may have destabilizing consequences for Bulgaria, Macedonia and Montenegro, Didier Reynders said.

BRUSSELS — Greece's possible exit from the Eurozone could threaten to destabilize the whole Balkan region, Belgian Foreign Minister Didier Reynders said Monday. "I'm afraid that it [Grexit] could have geopolitical consequences in the region. We must not forget that the Greek influence in the Balkans is very significant, as it is one of the key investors in the region. The consequences can affect not only the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro, but also… Bulgaria, if we consider difficulties in stabilizing this area," Reynders told the RTL Belgium Radio. The European economies are yet to analyze the consequences of Grexit, but there is no doubt they will exist, the minister added. On Sunday, over 60 percent of Greek voters said 'No' to a recent bailout deal proposed by the country's international lenders and rejected by the country’s government. The vote boosted speculation about Greece’s possible exit from the Eurozone amid the country’s financial crisis. Ahead of the referendum, many European economists commented publicly that it would be difficult to keep the euro in Greece in the event of a "no" vote, as the support of European credit institutions on which the Greek banking system is dependent, could be withdrawn. Such a situation would force Greece to create its own means of exchange, namely, reintroduce its own currency to keep its economy running, which would effectively mean Grexit. Greece is one of the countries worst hit by the 2008-2009 financial crisis. The country’s overall debt stands at about $350 billion, of which $270 billion is owed to the European Central Bank (ECB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

 

Balkan States Weigh Impact of Greece’s ‘No’ (BIRN, 6 July 2015)

Officials in the Balkans are weighing up the potential impact of the Greek referendum result on their countries amid warnings that a deepening of the crisis could damage economies in the region

As political leaders surveyed the potential fallout from the Greek referendum, Belgian foreign minister Didier Reynders warned on Monday that if Athens leaves the Eurozone, it could destabilise economies in the Balkans. “We must not forget that the Greek influence in the Balkans is very significant, as it is one of the key investors in the region. The consequences can affect not only the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro, but also… Bulgaria,” Reynders told Belgium’s RTL radio station. In Sunday’s referendum, Greek voters overwhelmingly rejected austerity proposals from the country’s creditors - the ECB, the EU and the IMF. As a result, an emergency Eurozone summit has been called for Tuesday. Macedonia’s central bank said however that it did not plan any new measures to protect the country’s financial system. The bank last week restricted capital outflow from Macedonian banks into Greece. “We will monitor the situation with the solvency of the Greek banking sector and we will react if necessary,” Macedonian central bank governor Dimitar Bogov told media. In Montenegro, the central bank said last week that analysis indicated that the country will not be significantly affected by the crisis because its banking system is not closely linked to Greece and mutual trade levels are low. The head of the parliamentary committee on the economy and the budget, Aleksandar Damjanovic, said on Monday however that Montenegro should be ready if Greece leaves the Eurozone. “Montenegro should already have a ‘plan B’ with a clear and precise measures for all the institutions, which would be launched in case of a ‘Grexit’, in order to reduce the risks and impacts on Montenegro in case of such a scenario,” Damjanovic said. Meanwhile Bosnia and Herzegovina is already facing a serious liquidity crisis in the coming period after officials have announced last week that reforms, which were initially agreed with the EU and the IMF, will not be implemented. As Bosnia’s currency, the convertible mark, is directly linked to the euro, any fluctuation in the euro as a result of the ongoing Greek crisis will be immediately felt in the country, Banja Luka-based economist Sinisa Pepic told BIRN. “This would significantly worsen the position of our foreign debt, which is mostly in US dollars, and would reduce the amount of money from collected VAT that would go into the budgets,” Pepic said. In Serbia, Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic did not address the Greek vote directly but praised the austerity measures his administration has introduced to make the country “financially healthy”. “My job is to be sure that, when I leave the government, somebody else does not deal with bankruptcy like some Europe countries are facing today,” Vucic told reporters on Monday. Serbian economist Goran Nikolic told BIRN that the banking sector in the country could face problems because four Greek banks own around 15 per cent of the entire banking sector. “Greek bankruptcy could cause panic and this is what could put the banks [in Serbia] in jeopardy,” Nikolic said. A source within the Serbian national bank told Belgrade newspaper Blic on Saturday that the bank is carefully monitoring transactions between the Greek banks in Serbia and their headquarters in Greece because it wants to prevent the uncontrolled outflow of money from Serbia. Serbian Labour Minister Aleksandar Vulin, whose Movement of Socialists party is close to the Greek governing party Syriza, said meanwhile that the EU had to understand the message from Greece – “that there were small, ordinary people to be taken into account”. In EU member state Croatia, senior officials made no comment on Sunday’s referendum. But former president Ivo Josipovic said that it showed there were deep divisions in Greek society. “From this should be drawn a lesson that spending beyond one’s means will have to be paid off eventually,” Josipovic said. He added that “a common language, compromises and a sustainable resolution of the crisis must be found”.

 

The Summit will determine not only whether NATO enlarges, but also on how the West is perceived (NEOnline, 7 July 2015)

The Foreign Minister of Montenegro, Igor Luksic, visited Brussels on Tuesday as diplomatic activity begins to focus on the next NATO Summit in Warsaw, Poland in July 2016; he is seeking nothing less than membership. But, there is something larger at play at the forthcoming Summit. The Warsaw Summit will be a test for the identity of the European security architecture and the perception of the West at large. On the one hand, there are discussions within traditional non-aligned states, namely Finland and Sweden, for whom the Ukrainian conflict was a moment of reckoning and are contemplating NATO integration. Both countries see the violation of their air space, territorial waters, and cyberspace as a signal that their neutrality is no longer an adequate guarantee of non-aggression. On the other hand, NATO is dealing with the substance of its enlargement policy, a question that is not merely about “ambition” but also resolve. And the question of ambition is extremely consequential, since the organization is one of the two pillars of Euro-Atlantic integration and – in practice if not in principle – membership in NATO emboldens the bid for EU membership. If one door looks shut, it will be of “the West,” not of “an organization.” Of course, each candidacy is judged on its own merits. One of the critical issues at hand is whether or not Podgorica is “ready.” Another is whether NATO is. Since the Bucharest Summit in 2008 it became clear that Russia was willing to be assertive in the post-Soviet space, particularly vis-à-vis Ukraine and Georgia, two countries independent since 1991, but which Russia continues to regard as “Near Abroad.” Montenegro has been independent since 2006; it is a small country of barely 620,000 people. Nonetheless, NATO enlargement has always been seen by Moscow as essentially a policy of engulfment and quintessentially aggressive. Initially, the red line for Moscow was drawn in the post-Soviet space, not in the Balkans. Now, Russia is a factor in the “Middle-Abroad,” that is, the Balkans. True, Montenegro is easier to absorb than other Balkan states. Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia suffer from domestic upheavals that latter is also at odds with Greece. “Taking in” Montenegro would be less about geopolitics and more about affirming the “open door” policy that NATO has never denounced. NATO’s latest enlargement was in 2009, when it absorbed Croatia and Albania, that is, a year following Russia’s invasion of Georgia. At the time, Russia was not a factor in the Balkans. True, admitting Georgia in the “Near Abroad” may be more complicated, geopolitically speaking. Whilst the country contributes more to NATO operations than several member states, 20% of its territory is occupied. At the same time, the country is a reform champion. Whether Montenegro has fulfilled the package of democratic reforms required is an open question. In reality, Montenegro may be far behind in both security sector and democratic governance reform benchmarks other countries in East Partnership region. NATO’s Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, has called for legal system reforms. But, there is apparently also the Russian factor to consider. An article published on Monday on Wall Street Journal sites Lukasz Kulesa, research director in the European Leadership Network, suggesting that Russia is a factor when reflecting upon the Montenegrin candidacy. Russia has invested considerably in leading sectors of the country’s tourist based economy and it took courage to engage Podgorica in EU sanctions against Russia. But, this is not the issue at hand. It is member states apparently who have second thoughts about challenging Russia, in the “Middle Abroad.”