LOCAL PRESS

 

Wadephul: Redrawing of borders not good (Tanjug)

 

Germany wants Serbia to join the EU, but drawing new borders between Serbia and Kosovo is not good, says Johann Wadephul, a representative of the ruling CDU/CSU coalition in the German Bundestag, who met with Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic. Vadeful told Tanjug that the two sides should negotiate and find a solution to normalize relations, that Germany is highly appreciative of efforts in that direction, but it will not change its opinion regarding borders. During a meeting with Vucic, Vadeful supported the readiness of Belgrade and Pristina to resume dialogue and normalize relations and upheld Germany’s views regarding change of borders set forth by Merkel, the cabinet of the Serbian President announced. Vucic said that “few people in the world know exactly where the borders of Serbia and of Kosovo are” and underlined that he believes that a deal between Serbs and Albanians would be decisive for both nations.

 

Djuric: Attitude towards missing must be sincere (Tanjug)

 

The attitude towards the issue of the missing must reflect our joint sincerity in efforts to ensure a stable future to the region and finally close a historical chapter of conflicts and hatred, the Head of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija Marko Djuric said ahead of 30 August, International Day of the Disappeared. Year after year, the day reminds states and societies in the region of the unfulfilled obligation to the families of people who have gone missing in war conflicts in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, he noted. He said that the fate of 1,648 people that went missing in Kosovo has remained unknown.

 

Support of OSCE Mission to process of Constitution amendment (Beta)

 

Serbian Justice Minister Nela Kuburovic spoke with Head of the OSCE Mission to Serbia Andrea Orizio about the process of amendment of the Serbian Constitution and further activities of the Ministry on fulfilling the tasks defined in the Action Plan for Chapter 23. Kuburovic pointed out that the Ministry is finalizing work on the drafting of constitutional amendments in the field of justice, which will be fully compliant with the recommendations of the Venice Commission. The recommendations of this body, as she pointed out, are binding for Serbia, primarily because it is defined in the Action Plan for the negotiation Chapter 23, adopted by the European Commission. The Minister added that after the making of a new draft, a round table will be organized in which everyone interested will be introduced to the new text of the amendment, which at the same time will be an opportunity to eliminate all possible doubts.

Orizio underlined that Serbia has made progress in judicial reform, and that the Ministry of Justice has a difficult task in this process. According to him, amendments to the Constitution in the field of justice are of great importance for strengthening the independence and accountability of the judiciary, and very important from the point of view of where and how Serbia sees itself in the future. Speaking about the process of amending the Constitution, Kuburovic stated that this is a very complicated process that requires several phases, involving a large number of actors, and also requires political consensus within the parliament itself. Accordingly, Orizio stressed that the OSCE Mission in Serbia is at the disposal of the Ministry of Justice for the provision of the necessary expert assistance, and that it continues to support Serbia on the road to its strategic goals.

 

Commander: We operate under UNSCR 1244 (Beta)

 

Problems can only be solved by leaders talking and the people of Kosovo are waiting for them to start political talks, a senior KFOR Commander Nick Ducic told Beta on Tuesday. Colonel, commander of the US KFOR base Bondsteel, said there is less tension now with people going on vacation and children getting ready to go back to school. “People are also waiting for their political leaders to start political talks,” he said and added that the EU-mediated Belgrade-Pristina dialogue is the way to solve problems.  According to him, KFOR is sometimes concerned when tension rise after people hear news reports that do not reflect the situation on the ground. The KFOR mission remains the same he said. “We are here to secure freedom of movement for everyone and we operate under UNSCR 1244,” he said. Replying to questions about Kosovo's intention to transform Kosovo Security Force into a regular army Ducic thinks that the Constitution of Kosovo would have to be changed first. “For now KFOR is carrying out the mission successfully. I believe there are much more important issues today than whether that transformation will happen,” Ducic assessed.

 

REGIONAL PRESS

 

Mektic: Ruling authority is preparing incidents in RS ahead of elections (TV1)

 

Addressing a press conference in Banja Luka on Tuesday, Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) Minister of Security Dragan Mektic warned that safety of citizens of Republika Srpska (RS), particularly in Banja Luka, is endangered as “nobody can feel safe after the attack on BNTV journalist Vladimir Kovacevic and the murder of David Dragicevic”. He added that citizens are not allowed to think on their own. Mektic also warned that the ruling authority is preparing incidents ahead of the upcoming general elections. “The ruling authority in the RS is doing everything, including engagement of criminal groups, to intimidate citizens of the RS. In an organized manner, the ruling authority is preparing major incidents in Banja Luka,” Mektic was quoted as saying. He noted that a similar thing was done four years ago, when 128 Don Cossacks came to the RS and atmosphere of fear was created in media. According to Mektic, these “severe incidents” will not go too far from “these attempted murders or murders” that are supposed to break Banja Luka psychologically. He explained that the attack on Kovacevic represents an attempted murder, warning that there are criminals in Banja Luka who assassinate people for the needs of the ruling authority. While answering a journalist’s question regarding the fact that Russian citizen Zakhar Prilepin was banned from entering B&H, Mektic explained that he did not sign any kind of a blacklist and that the B&H Ministry of Security has nothing to do with operational activities of the B&H Intelligence-Security Agency (OSA). He noted that Prilepin has visited B&H on more than 20 occasions and that he entered the country illegally on most of these occasions. “He was only registered in 2017. How did he come? How did he enter B&H every time? What did he do? Who was he with? Whom did he meet? What were the meetings about?” Mektic argued. Mektic also noted that Prilepin had been meeting with RS President Milorad Dodik and movie director Emir Kusturica in Andricgrad and was engaged in making plans how to destroy the RS opposition. The reporter noted that the ruling authority and the opposition seem to have continued to accuse each other of trying to sabotage the elections. Meanwhile, media outlets that are believed to be under political control have continued to target certain citizens, journalists and politicians as “unwanted”, although the pre-election campaign has not even started yet, the reporter concluded.

 

SNSD: Prosecutor’s Office should check Mektic’s claims about incidents ahead of elections (TV1/RTRS)

 

SNSD issued a press release shortly after the press conference of B&H Minister of Security Dragan Mektic in Banja Luka on Tuesday. According to the press release, Mektic made up the story about incidents being prepared ahead of the upcoming general elections. In this context, SNSD urged the competent Prosecutor’s Office to check Mektic’s information. “If he claims to have reliable information on any kind of violence that is about to happen in Banja Luka or the RS, the Prosecutor’s Office should react and he should share this information with the public in the RS,” reads the press release. Kovacevic said that Mektic’s actions are detrimental for the RS’ interests, and banning Russian writer Zakhar Prilepin from entering B&H is one of examples of detrimental actions. RS Prime Minister Zeljka Cvijanovic said that the opposition plans to make some kind of incidents and then accuse the authority of being the ‘master mind’ behind them. Ruling coalition representatives believe that all that opposition does is aimed at discrediting the government in the RS, but in the process, they reveal their true faces and that is why citizens never give their trust to them. Cvijanovic said that the opposition actually thinks about creation of chaos and undermining of stability, while the ruling authorities remain stable and calm.

An initiative of Caucus of SNSD and DNS for the removal of Dragan Mektic is on the agenda of a session of B&H House of Representatives (HoR) scheduled for 4 September. According to the initiative, the Ministry of Security is primarily and fully responsible of escalation of the migrant crisis in B&H. The initiative also reads that Mektic gave false and unchecked information to the public, which gave strong contribution to make institutions of B&H unready to face with the great migrant influx.

 

Ivanic: OSA B&H could not have prevented Prilepin from entering B&H (ATV)

 

Serb member of the B&H Presidency Mladen Ivanic commented on Tuesday the ban of entering B&H to Russian writer Zakhar Prilepin. Ivanic said that the Intelligence-Security Agency of B&H (OSA B&H) could not have prevented Prilepin from entering B&H, explaining that such decisions can only be made by political bodies of the executive government, competent ministry or the B&H Council of Ministers (B&H CoM). Ivanic said he would not comment the ban until he had all the information and currently he is investigating how this happened in the first place. According to Ivanic, this is a very complex issue, because – based on information he has – there are over 2,000 persons who are banned from entering B&H, and over 1,950 of people participated in Syrian battlegrounds. The B&H Presidency member stressed that it is necessary to investigate this well, and not have hasty reactions or carry out any sorts of misuses. The Presidency member warned that those who misuse the situation will be held responsible for it.

 

Austria to deploy additional 150 soldiers in B&H as part of EUFOR (Dnevni list)

 

The Austrian Ministry of Defense (MoD) has announced that the Austrian Army will send additional soldiers for the EUFOR’s needs. The MoD noted that the Western Balkans is important for Austria’s foreign and defense policy, adding that the Austrian Army is contributing the most to missions in B&H and Kosovo. Starting 15 September, the Austrian Army will deploy additional 150 soldiers to the EUFOR mission. According to the article, Austria currently has 193 soldiers in B&H. It also reminds that a military contingent from the UK has arrived to Sarajevo in order to take part in EUFOR’s ‘Quick Response 2018’ exercise.

 

Prime Minister meets with German Chancellor Merkel (Hina/N1/HRT)

 

Croatia and Germany will soon sign an action plan on strengthening political, economic and cultural relations, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the visiting Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic said in Berlin on Tuesday. "The action plan is being prepared and we are hammering out the details," Merkel said after the talks with Plenkovic. The document is likely to be signed at a ministerial level in the coming months, according to Plenkovic. "We want to use good relations between our two countries so as to ensure that they assume a new structure on the political, economic and cultural plan" Plenkovic said. The German chancellor supported Croatia's aspirations to enter the passport-free Schengen Zone. I believe that we are going in the good direction and Germany very positively perceives Croatia's aspirations to join the Schengen area, she added. When it comes to possibilities of changing borders in the Balkans, Croatia is cautious as this could have an impact on the neighborhood, the Croatian Prime Minister said.

Merkel, who has recently reiterated that there has been no need to change the borderlines in the western Balkan region, agreed with Plenkovic's statement. Before his meeting with Merkel, the Croatian Prime Minister held talks with officials of the German Chamber of Commerce and Industry. N1 reported that in the context of regional relations, officials said that they put focus on solving of regional issues between Pristina and Belgrade. Merkel said that Croatia has an important role in the region, and added that she is aware that the neighborhood is complicated, putting special emphasis to the situation in B&H and problems with Slovenia. The reporter noted that Merkel and Plenkovic underlined the importance of bilateral relations of Croatia with Serbia and B&H due to enlargement of the EU in the southeastern Europe, especially when it comes to the European future of B&H. Plenkovic noted that Croatia will take over the presidency over the EU Council in 2020 which, according to him, is a great opportunity to repeat the Berlin Process from 2014. "We want Croatia to be a host of a summit of countries of the EU and our neighboring countries from Southeast Europe. Through the Berlin Process, Germany in 2014 demonstrated leadership and strong support in project, economic and infrastructure cooperation and we believe that 2020 at the beginning of mandate of new Commission, new Parliament and new financial perspective can be an additional incentive for our neighbors in EU reforms," Plenkovic underlined.

 

Markovic: Dacic’s statement is rude and not worthy of any comments (RTCG)

 

Statement made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Serbia, Ivica Dacic, that he is worried about the discrimination of Serbs in Montenegro is rude, said Dusko Markovic, Prime Minister of Montenegro, during the informal meeting of prime ministers of Western Balkans held in Durrës. “That statement is not true and is rude. That’s all I can say about that,” said Markovic.

Two days ago, Dacic spoke to the president of New Serb Democracy (NOVA), Andrija Mandic, and said that he was afraid of the potential existence of organized political action aimed against Serbs in Montenegro. He was also concerned that the citizens of Montenegro suffer tortures inflicted on them by Montenegrin judiciary and prosecutor’s office.

 

Dimitrov meets NATO Deputy Secretary General, affirms Macedonia's determination to join the Alliance (MIA)

 

Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov and NATO Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller discussed Tuesday in Brussels on Macedonia’s preparations for the NATO accession talks.

Dimitrov briefed Gottemoeller about the current developments in Macedonia, namely the activities for organizing upcoming referendum and the country’s progress in implementing the reforms, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a press release. He also extended gratitude to NATO for inviting Macedonia to start the accession talks. “We resolutely move on the path toward membership Macedonia has paved 25 years ago. We will accomplish this historic mission, in the interest of our stability and prosperity, making the Balkans as well as Europe more stable,” Dimitrov said. Gottemoeller voiced readiness for supporting Macedonia’s efforts to join the Alliance and hope that the country would be able to take advantage of the door wide open, the press release reads.

 

US Congressmen meet Sekerinska, congratulate Macedonia on NATO membership invitation (MIA)

 

Macedonia is proud of the strategic partnership with the United States and appreciates the support of official Washington for its EU and NATO membership, Defense Minister Radmila Sekerisnka said Tuesday at a meeting with a delegation of US Congressmen, led by Bill Flores.

The meeting affirmed the excellent partnership between the two countries and the US support of the ongoing reforms in Macedonia, the Ministry of Defense said in a press release. The US delegation also congratulated Macedonia on the invitation for starting the NATO accession talks.

There is no alternative for Macedonia but to become part of the EU and NATO, which enjoys the support of 75% of the citizens, Sekerinska said. “NATO and EU membership will boost investment, trade, grant access to the broader common EU market, increase people's mobility, goods and capital, help us create more jobs and keep the youth in their homeland,” she said.

 

Meta interview regarding Belgrade – Pristina dialogue: Dialogue aims at accepting reality, not altering it! (ADN)

 

Any discussion and debate that helps in understanding and accepting the reality is welcome. Any deviation from this reality can provoke emotions and populist rhetoric and it does not bring any benefit, says the President of the Republic of Albania Mr. Ilir Meta, in this exclusive interview with ADN. While the debate over border changes has been for several weeks now the main topic of Serbia-Kosovo dialogue process, as President Aleksandar Vucic and Hashim Thaci openly embraced and promoted the idea, this proposal apparently caught off guard the politicians and main parties in Pristina. Despite viral comments and analyses of several authors in the press, official Tirana remained somewhat "pending", waiting for further developments to clear the horizon of this unexpected news. Recently the Albanian Foreign Minister Ditmir Bushati received a representative delegation of Presevo Valley Albanians. His message to them and a later interview with the Albanian daily Panorama, made it clear that the Albanian government wasn't enthusiastic at all regarding the idea of land swaps between Kosovo and Serbia. In this interview, President Meta's stance on the issue: The Balkans' historical past is unfortunately linked to border changes, ethnic cleansing and violent displacement of the populations which have been followed by great disputes, hostilities, wars...That's why, says Mr. Meta, the region should never again witness forced displacements, on the contrary: Any Kosovo-Serbia agreement should help grow the spirit of coexistence and harmony and to heal the sense of hatred sown from past and history. President Meta also extends a message to the Albanian population and the political factor in Macedonia, regarding the September 30 referendum on the name deal with Greece. Below the full interview:

 

ADN - Mr. President, there is an ongoing debate about border change between Serbia and Kosovo, a debate involving local and foreign politicians and many analysts. What is your position about this debate?

(President Meta) -The dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia is being built not to change the reality, but to guide the process on its final acceptance, in the name of peace and stability. It is a precondition for the European integration of both countries. Any discussion and debate that helps in understanding and accepting this reality is welcome. Any deviation from this reality can provoke emotions and populist rhetoric and it does not bring any benefit. The Balkans has undergone profound transformations in the last two decades while the US and EU have been investing a lot of efforts so far. One of the largest and most successful investments has been the independence of Kosovo and the ongoing dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia in the interest of normalizing relations, stability, peace and long-term security in the region. The Balkans' historical past is unfortunately linked to border changes, ethnic cleansing and violent displacement of the populations which have been followed by great disputes, hostilities, wars and hatred between nationalities. The agreement that may be reached today between the parties is important to fuel positive energy, to help grow the spirit of coexistence and harmony and to heal the sense of hatred sown from past and history.

 

ADN - Do you think history is being repeated? This process seems to be well coordinated by both parties...

-It is crucial that we not only never again witness scenes of forced displacement of families, whether Serbian or Albanian, but not even a single family should think of moving away as result of uncertainty that the current border change debate could bring.

 

ADN -What is Albania's role in this important issue?

-Albania has always been - and remains - a strong supporter of the dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia, mediated by the EU and supported by the US, and the conclusion of this dialogue should make the region more peaceful and our citizens safer for their future. For Albania, it is of particular importance the respect of basic principles enshrined in the OSCE's Helsinki and Paris Charter on Security in Europe, especially the principle of non-changing borders.

 

ADN -What does Serbia gain from this deal?

- The European Union, with its new enlargement strategy on Western Balkans has given a clear European integration perspective to all countries in this region. I believe that through the agreement with Kosovo, Serbia gains its European future, as it is known the good neighborliness is an indispensable and inevitable condition for all countries of the region, Serbia included.

Let's not forget that the January 2014 accession document that initiated the EU-Serbia negotiation process, highlights that both parties can continue on their respective European paths avoiding that one of them blocks the other in these efforts; and it should gradually lead to the comprehensive normalisation of relations between Serbia and Kosovo. EU and the USA are guarantors that the outcome of this agreement will provide Serbia with its path towards EU integration. Serbian authorities have often stated that Serbia's EU membership is very important and they are seriously engaged in this process. I want to emphasize that this is a benefit not only for Serbia, but also the Serbs living in Kosovo, and it is in the interest of all the countries of the region.

 

ADN -Kosovo President Hashim Thaci stated several times that changing the borders will be in the best interest of Kosovo's future...

-First, I would wish for Kosovo to join forces and energies that promote and support in unison the best interest of all citizens of Kosovo. I noticed that President Thaçi has several times emphasized the importance of the territorial integrity of Kosovo, the importance of its multi-ethnicity and the importance of stability in the region. These are very important principles that guarantee an irreversible and sustainable process.

 

ADN -How do you see Kosovo's future, Mr. President?

- The sovereignty and territorial integrity of Kosovo is a reality recognized and accepted by an overwhelming majority of the UN member countries.  Kosovo is actually a member of many international and regional organizations. The country is involved in an EU association process and its people are anxiously waiting the news of free movement of its citizens in European Union countries. Albania is proud to have contributed to these remarkable achievements and remains firm to its commitment for Kosovo's full membership in the UN and the EU.

 

ADN -Do you have any comment about Minister Bushati's recent interview about this issue?

-I stand by Albanian government in support of Kosovo's effort in persevering for the stability, territorial integrity, and multi-ethnicity of the state of Kosovo based on important international guarantees, such as Ahtisaari Plan, the decision of International Court of Justice of Hague that legitimized the full compliance with International Law regarding the Independence of Kosovo.

 

ADN -The European Union has not been very clear so far about the border issue. Your opinion, Mr. President?

-The model and principles of coexistence, harmony and peace among European Union countries is the model of melting of borders, especially ethnic ones. This is the way I see the process of integrating our region into the EU: towards making borders insignificant and not towards imposing of new borders. Any attempt to impose border change patterns under these conditions would not only undermine the region's stability, but would also endanger the spirit and principles of the EU which the Union has been invested for since its foundation.

 

INTERNATIONAL MEDIA SOURCES

 

Kosovo and Serbia: A dangerous but not unprecedented Balkan land swap (London School of Economics, by Andrea Lorenzo Capussela, 29 August 2018)

 

Kosovo and Serbia have recently discussed an exchange of territory, with some commentators suggesting a deal on a ‘land swap’ might be imminent. Andrea Lorenzo Capussela writes that while critics have rightly decried the plan as a redrawing of borders along ethnic lines, they neglect the fact that Kosovo itself is the product of a unilateral, ethnicity-based partition. He proposes a different approach for understanding the issue.

The crisis of Kosovo is three decades old. Its independence, declared in 2008, did not solve it. Kosovo is recognised by neither the UN, the EU, nor by a wide minority of the states of the world, which includes China, India, Indonesia, Russia, and many states that host separatist or restive minorities, such as Spain. Mutual distrust still divides Kosovo’s dominant Albanian majority from its small Serb minority. And its authorities have gained hardly any control over the northern part of its territory, adjacent to Serbia, which is inhabited predominantly by Serbs who rejected its independence and live in near-complete separation from the rest of the country.

Since 2008, therefore, EU foreign policy has devoted most of its energies to settling these problems through negotiations between Kosovo and Serbia. Particularly difficult is the ‘question of the north’, which closely replicates the question of Kosovo as it stood before its independence. The two heads of state are now considering a comprehensive agreement. All or part of north Kosovo would be ‘given’ to Serbia, in exchange for all or part of Serbia’s remaining Albanian-majority lands, which are contiguous to Kosovo. In parallel, Serbia would accept Kosovo’s independence and open to it the path to full international recognition. The idea was floated a few weeks ago. Both parliamentary oppositions, the Serbian Orthodox Church, and much of Kosovo’s public opinion spoke firmly against it, as did most analysts (e.g., in a previous EUROPP article I agree with; some rare favourable opinions are available here and here). Berlin declared border changes unacceptable, and even Kosovo’s governing majority seemed divided. Brussels remained conspicuously silent, however, and on 24 August Washington declared itself ready to accept the land swap. During a public debate, on the following day the two presidents suggested that the deal is imminent. Most objections raised against it are convincing. Border changes are usually dangerous, especially if the motivation is an ethnic one, and this is particularly true in the Balkans, where some states remain fragile. But both sides of the debate seem to forget that ethnicity-based border change has one clear precedent in that region, one which the main western powers engineered and many analysts firmly backed. I refer to Kosovo, naturally, which broke away from Serbia for a motivation – which is the obverse of the atrocious repression of Kosovo’s Albanians by the Milosevic regime – that can safely be described as an ethnic one. The 2007 report of the UN mediator for the Kosovo crisis is quite frank – perhaps unwittingly so, in retrospect – on this last point: A history of enmity and mistrust has long antagonised the relationship between Kosovo Albanians and Serbs… For the past eight years, Kosovo and Serbia have been governed in complete separation [for in 1999 Kosovo was placed under a UN protectorate]… This is a reality one cannot deny; it is irreversible. A return of Serbian rule over Kosovo would not be acceptable to the overwhelming majority of the people of Kosovo [Albanians then represented about 90 per cent of the population]. Belgrade could not regain its authority without provoking violent opposition. No matter how wide the autonomy granted to it may be, the mediator concludes, keeping Kosovo within the borders of Serbia is ‘simply not tenable’. This, next to their own broader political objectives, explains why in 2008 the main Western powers chose to carve out an exception from their allegiance to the principle of the territorial integrity of states, the authority of the UN, and the civic conception of citizenship, and allowed Kosovo to terminate the UN protectorate and secede from Serbia without either Belgrade’s or the Security Council’s consent. ‘Simply not tenable’ cuts both ways, however. Indeed, a double partition – splitting at once Kosovo from Serbia and the north from Kosovo – would probably have been a more convenient solution, if a doubly unprincipled one: once one opts for ethnicity-based partition, one might prefer to avoid as much ethnic coexistence as possible. In 2007 informal talks on such a solution failed, however, and since then the West’s and most analysts’ discourse on Kosovo is entirely couched in the language of the intangibility of borders and the civic notion of citizenship. Hence the criticism of the proposed land swap. But if a unilateral ethnicity-based border change was acceptable in 2008, why is a consensual one unacceptable in 2018? This objection challenges both the argument from principle and that from consequences, for the Balkans adjusted fairly orderly to Kosovo’s controversial secession: why would a lesser, less sensitive, and consensual border change produce worse consequences?

Naturally, even though the supporters of Kosovo’s independence cannot very credibly invoke it, the argument from principle remains valid. But its relevance is not obvious, because Kosovo never gained solid control of the north. Under the effectiveness principle, which is arguably the only basis for Kosovo’s statehood, this might imply that the north never became part of the new state: so what is generally called the ‘partition’ of the north would simply be the waiving of Kosovo’s claim to it. As to the consequences of the land swap, critics point chiefly to dangerous repercussions in Bosnia and Macedonia. They focus on the likely dynamics in those countries, however, and seem to neglect the fact that this would be a consensual border change. This is a valid rejoinder, but what does ‘consensual’ mean? Both Kosovo and Serbia are run by fairly unaccountable governments, which seem to fear rather than desire public debate on their policy choices. Without popular support, an agreement between the two capitals is likely to leave a heritage of mutual recriminations and territorial claims, which could defeat the very purpose of the deal. This would be a sufficient reason to oppose it, even before one considers the regional repercussions. Inversely, if the deal were put to a referendum in both countries and if open, reasoned debate were allowed, its consequences – internal, bilateral, regional, and broader – would probably be far less dangerous, and it is not obvious that the argument from principle would militate against a land swap agreed by two sovereign states after careful public scrutiny and democratic deliberation. This might be a moot point, however, as neither country is likely to meet this standard. A third objection, and probably the tallest one, concerns the fate of the remaining minorities. Kosovo’s Serbs are gravely marginalised, in fact, and the same is often said of Serbia’s Albanians (on whose conditions I am not informed, however): those who will remain within the borders of their current state after the land swap would become even more vulnerable, might be the target of resentment, especially if the deal is not backed by genuine popular consensus, and could anyway eventually be driven to emigrate. Border change is one way of solving the question of minorities, in fact: by getting rid of them rather than by including them. The EU and the West have invested much in the latter solution: opposing the land swap would be a credible way of insisting on it. Besides some fundamental international norms, to conclude, Kosovo’s independence directly challenged the civic notion of citizenship. This deal would compound the damage. Kosovo’s independence may well have been inevitable, as the UN mediator argued, but this was only true because of the long chain of atrocities and policy mistakes that preceded it. This land swap is not inevitable, conversely, and by refusing to support it the main western powers would begin to mend that damage. (Incidentally, it will be interesting to see whether US support for a controversial idea will again prevail and split the EU, as it did in 2008). But other consequences of that chain of mistakes would remain, in the shape of a state lacking international recognition, a contested territory, and two marginalised minorities. The rejection of this deal should therefore be accompanied by a revision of the policies hitherto followed on these matters, whose failure largely explains why a land swap was proposed.

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

Andrea Lorenzo Capussela led the economic and fiscal affairs office of Kosovo’s supervisor, the International Civilian Office, and is the author of State-Building in Kosovo: Democracy, Corruption, and the EU in the Balkans (I.B. Tauris, 2015), and of The Political Economy of Italy’s Decline (Oxford University Press, 2018).