Serbias United Strategy Cracks Apart at the Seams Before they even got to the negotiating table, Serbia's leaders have already broken ranks in public on Kosovo's future.
By Dragana Nikolic-Solomon in Belgrade (12-Oct-05) Weeks from the probable start of negotiations on Kosovos future status, it is still not known who will be in Serbias negotiating team, while cracks are showing in what had been billed as a unified platform. The disagreements may end up prolonging the talks and so jeopardising the position of the Serb minority in Kosovo, according to some analysts. A united strategy was agreed last spring, ending years in which various political blocs in Serbia had all proposed different solutions for the break-away majority Albanian province. United around the vague formula of more than autonomy, less than independence, Serbs ruled out independence as an option. They said it contravened international norms on the inviolability of state borders and would lead to instability in the region and in Serbia. More precise details of Serbias negotiating plan were revealed in mid-September by the new head of the governments Coordinating Centre for Kosovo, Sanda Raskovic-Ivic, of the Democratic Party of Serbia, DSS, led by Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica. She told the media that Serbia would insist on retaining overall sovereignty over Kosovo while conceding executive, judicial and legislative power to the local authorities. According to Raskovic-Ivic, Kosovos borders would be patrolled by Serbia and Montenegros army and Kosovo would not be entitled to a seat at the United Nations. When it came to defence and foreign affairs, Serbia and Montenegro would continue to represent Kosovo. However, these proposals have only created new political misunderstandings within Serbia. Serbias President, Boris Tadic, leader of the opposition Democratic Party, DS, told the media a few days later that Raskovic-Ivics new proposals differed from the platform he and Kostunica had hammered out as common Serbian policy. He said Raskovic-Ivic had also revealed details of a tactical and strategic character, which should not have been made public. Meanwhile Serbia and Montenegros Foreign Minister and leader of the Serbian Renewal Movement, SPO, Vuk Draskovic proposed his own solution. This was based on the Z4 plan offered to the break-away Croatian Serbs a decade ago but never acted on. This would give Kosovo its own government, prime minister, parliament, president, police, currency and budget on the condition that it acknowledged Serbias sovereignty. Draskovic said this formula could be the cornerstone in the search for a negotiated solution between Pristina and Belgrade. Tadic criticised Draskovics plan, however, saying this scenario was also out of the framework which was agreed upon within the political leadership. Tadic added: I would love to know which Serbian government plan I should discuss with the authorities and which is the common plan we should present. He concluded: As Serbian president I am also responsible for Kosovo negotiations. The rifts between the DS and the DSS date back to their time as allies within the Serbian opposition movement which brought down Slobodan Milosevics regime in October 2000. The differences in policies between the moderately nationalist DSS and the pro-European DS were encapsulated in the bitter battle between their two leaders, the late Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic and the current Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica. Dusan Prorokovic, a DSS member and head of the Serbian parliamentary committee on Kosovo denied there was any misunderstanding amongst the political leadership. All [of the] main points of the platform have been agreed upon, he told Balkan Insight. The current problems in communications between the two parties [the DS and DSS] should not block their communications when Kosovo and Metohija are discussed. Dusan Batakovic, Tadics advisor on Kosovo, disagreed, saying that Serbias politicians had revealed different stances, which he suggested might damage Serbias strategic interests. Co-ordination, which is a basic condition for future work on establishing a common platform for the forthcoming negotiations, does not exist, said Batakovic. Another presidential advisor on Kosovo, Leon Kojen, was more optimistic, saying the two parties may yet find a common language. Kojen said the Serbian leadership had already discussed several documents that would form the basis for the Serbian negotiating platform. Through a slight adjustment of these documents, a widely accepted negotiation platform might be formulated, he said. For now, however, analysts say it remains unclear which platform Serbia will reveal at the negotiating table. The Serbian platform is not unified and there is real confusion [within the leadership], Nicholas Whyte, Europe program director of the International Crisis Group (ICG), told Balkan Insight. Whyte added that while the status of Kosovo remains unresolved, the issue affects Serbias economy, security and reform process. A former Serbia and Montenegro Foreign Minister, Goran Svilanovic, told Balkan Insight that co-operation between Kostunica and Tadic ahead of Kosovo negotiations was crucial. Party disputes are one thing, but all other misunderstandings must be put aside once serious negotiations are entered into, he said. Svilanovic said neither Serbias platform nor the names of the negotiation team needed to be revealed now. Even if the negotiating team is not ready, it is not too late for it to be prepared as negotiations have not started yet, he said. But Nebojsa Covic, the former head of the governments Kosovo Coordination Centre and leader of the Social Democratic Party, warned that if Belgrade failed to prepare well for the negotiations, the outcome would be Kosovos conditional independence. Belgrade should step forward with a clear and concrete stance on what is sovereignty, what is territorial integrity, and what the maximum and the minimum is, he said. Judy Batt, from the Paris-based Institute for Security Studies, said if Serbia was not ready to start negotiations, it might delay solving Kosovos final status. Batt said prolonging the talks might have adverse implications for Kosovo Serbs and for neighbouring Macedonia, which has a large Albanian population, fuelling violence in Kosovo. Minna Jarvempaa, an analyst at the European Stability Initiative, ESI, a research and policy institute, said lack of coherence both in Belgrade and Pristina - and a lack of clarity over how the whole process should be carried on - might make the negotiation process very cumbersome. The process might be drawn out for both sides, not only because of irreconcilable differences but because of the lack of a road map, she said. Batt said another problem was that Serbia lacked a strong leadership that could deliver a settlement. Serbia will loose an opportunity to gain something for the Kosovo Serb minority, she said. She said that Serbias demands for the Kosovo Serbs to enjoy security, decentralisation and the protection of their historic heritage might be lost if Serbia failed to act resolutely and responsibly. Decentralisation, some form of territorial autonomy for the Serbs, including an international presence that will guarantee stability, could represent a realistic compromise, Batt went on. Batt added that Serbia and Montenegros path to Europe would be open if Serbia could only solve its remaining problems, such as cooperation with the Hague tribunal and the demands of Montenegro and Kosovo for independence. According to Batt, Serbian public opinion is now ready to be told what it already knows, which is that Kosovo is lost. Serbias ability to prove that it is a viable state, which can solve difficult issues, will be in turn met with EU readiness to speed up the process of EU integration, she said. Sources close to the government also admit privately that Kosovo is lost. However they also add that no one is ready to confess that in public as it would mean political suicide. They are aware that Kosovo is lost but they want to gain at least something - ideally, two or three municipalities - where Kosovo Serbs are the majority and which they [the local Serbs] would control, one source close to the government told Balkan Insight. Dragana Nikolic-Solomon is the editor of Balkan Insight in Serbia and the director of the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network, BIRN in Serbia. Balkan Insight is BIRNs on line publication. http://www.birn.eu.com/insight_03_3_eng.php Serbian News Network - SNN [email protected] http://www.antic.org/
