thedispatch.com <https://thedispatch.com/p/why-the-us-is-hosting-a-summit-with> 
 


Why the U.S. Is Hosting a Summit With Kosovo and Serbia


Dalibor Rohac

7-9 minutes

  _____  

Transatlantic relations have been, to say the least, turbulent during Trump’s 
presidency. The United States and the EU have disagreed vehemently on defense 
spending, security issues, and energy infrastructure.

The future of the Western Balkans has now come into crosshairs, too—with two 
streams of negotiations on Kosovo underway, hosted by the United States and the 
EU, respectively. Today, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić will meet Kosovo 
Prime Minister Avdullah Hoti at the White House—just three days before the 
EU-sponsored expert-level dialogue resumes in Brussels.

Following almost a decade of NATO-led peacekeeping, Kosovo declared 
independence from Serbia in 2008. Unlike most governments around the world, 
Belgrade never recognized Kosovo’s independence, and the process of 
‘normalizing’ relations between the two has dragged on ever since. Even more 
than the rest of the Balkans, Kosovo’s is a fragile state and its frozen ethnic 
conflict could unfreeze easily, with deadly consequences for the region.

The White House summit, originally scheduled for the end of June, 
understandably irked the Europeans. Trump’s man convening the meeting, Special 
Envoy Richard Grenell, managed to alienate much of Germany’s political class 
during his brief stint as U.S. ambassador to Berlin. And while this time around 
he claims 
<https://www.glasamerike.net/a/kosovo-agenda-sastanak-vasington-srbija-kosovvo/5566828.html>
  to “support our friends in Europe,” the talks today fit well into the image 
of a U.S. administration too eager for publicity stunts.

While the summit in June did implode, it was not, as one would suspect, because 
of the Trump administration’s incompetence. Rather, it unraveled under the EU’s 
pressure. First, Kosovo President Hashim Thaçi—already halfway across the 
Atlantic—was indicted for war crimes by the Kosovo Specialist Chambers, a court 
set up under the EU’s auspices. Then Prime Minister Hoti, expected to arrive in 
Washington, canceled. The next day, both he and Vučić appeared in Brussels to 
meet with the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, who 
announced a reinvigoration of the EU-led Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue.

Does that make the White House meeting today superfluous? Not really. For one, 
the lingering question of Kosovo’s recognition by Serbia, unacceptable to 
Belgrade, has been left front and center of the EU’s recent efforts. But the 
EU-led talks will be “meaningless” if they focus on Kosovo’s recognition as a 
sovereign state, according to 
<https://www.euractiv.com/section/enlargement/news/serbia-kosovo-leaders-gear-up-for-tough-us-talks/>
  Vučić.

Moreover, the EU’s largely technocratic, process-oriented approach that ought 
to 
<https://exit.al/en/2020/08/28/eu-envoy-lajcak-land-swaps-are-not-on-kosovo-serbia-dialogue-agenda/>
  “help [Serbia and Kosovo] move forward on their respective European paths” 
has been constantly undercut by reluctant member states, especially France, 
which view future EU enlargements with suspicion. As a result, the bloc has 
achieved little progress in the region since the Brussels Agreement in 2013, 
which committed Kosovo and Serbia to a gradual “normalization” of their 
relationship. That was predicated on a continuation of the accession process, 
which has now stalled. Kosovo, meanwhile, has yet to be granted visa-free 
access to EU member states, despite meeting the relevant criteria two years ago.

Perhaps Europeans can take solace in the notion that the “normalization of 
relations between Kosovo and Serbia is a serious process,” as the EU special 
representative for the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue Miroslav Lajčák tweeted 
<https://twitter.com/MiroslavLajcak/status/1300432861737168897> , “rather than 
an act.” Tellingly, Lajčák’s own home country of Slovakia—where he served as 
foreign minister for a decade—numbers among the five EU member states not to 
have recognized Kosovo’s status as an independent country, making him an odd 
figure to press for the “normalization” of Serbia’s relations with Kosovo.

At what seems a low point in transatlantic relations, it is worth remembering 
that the US and EU interests in the Western Balkans largely coincide. Their 
respective toolboxes and their willingness to use them, however, do not. 
European unwillingness to stop the war in the Balkans during the 1990s ended 
only when America decided to lead the charge. And since the Obama 
administration lost interest in dialogue over Kosovo in 2008, considering it a 
European problem, progress stalled. For all the administration’s lack of 
subtlety, having the United States back in the game is beneficial if only 
because it creates a sense of urgency in Brussels.

One big factor to consider is how the “serious process” has led to a power 
vacuum now filled by Russia and China. President Vučić famously called European 
solidarity a “fairy tale 
<https://www.nationalreview.com/news/coronavirus-outbreak-serbian-president-aleksandar-vucic-labels-european-solidarity-fairy-tale-says-only-china-can-assist-in-coronavirus-response/>
 ” while praising Chinese medical assistance in the early days of the COVID-19 
crisis. Russia, meanwhile, has firmly entrenched itself in Serbia’s energy 
sector, and its malign influence and meddling have successfully exploited the 
themes of Serbian, or Orthodox, victimhood. Characteristic of Russia’s interest 
in perpetuating the dysfunctional status quo and frozen conflict, Russian 
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said 
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/with-us-summit-planned-russia-prefers-eu-kosovo-mediation/2020/06/18/d6bf8ae4-b175-11ea-98b5-279a6479a1e4_story.html>
  in June that any agreement between Kosovo and Serbia had to be subject to 
approval by the U.N. Security Council—thereby reserving a veto power for 
Russia. It is also telling that before heading to Washington, President Vučić 
met with Russia’s ambassador on Wednesday to discuss the negotiations with 
Kosovo.

The meeting today presents an opportunity to push back against Russia’s and 
China’s activities in the region—an issue that the EU finds too awkward to 
discuss. Hard questions ought to be asked about Serbia’s recent purchases of 
missile-armed Chinese 
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebastienroblin/2020/07/09/missile-armed-chinese-drones-arrive-in-europe-for-serbian-military/#46e8cfea79d2>
  drones and their interest in Chinese air defense missiles 
<https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/08/11/serbia-considers-buying-chinese-missiles-despite-us-warning/>
 , and weapons from Russia 
<https://www.voanews.com/europe/more-russian-weapons-serbia-despite-us-sanction-threats>
 —let alone 5G, facial recognition cameras and Huawei’s extensive activities in 
Serbia. Brussels might be willing to turn a blind eye to Serbia’s “strategy of 
neutrality” but Washington must not, especially if Belgrade wishes to acquire 
American weapons.

And, as for the political settlement between Serbia and Kosovo, the Trump 
administration can use NATO security guarantees, financial assistance, and U.S. 
investment into infrastructure to get both sides to a deal. Arguably, the 
incentives are weaker than in the case of the other surprising ‘normalization’ 
that has recently been facilitated by the US: between Israel and the United 
Arab Emirates. While both Middle Eastern nations are concerned about Iran, 
Kosovo and Serbia continue to hold different views of their security 
environment and the challenges posed by Russia and China. Yet, contrary to 
Lajčák’s assertion, “normalization” can be an act and not an open-ended 
process. By the end of the day, we will likely know whether a U.S. offer, which 
neither side can refuse, is possible or whether the current limbo is likely to 
continue. That information will be in and by itself a useful one.

Either way, the West desperately needs a shared long-term strategy for the 
Western Balkans. And while their political methods and approaches to diplomacy 
might differ, Americans and Europeans should continue to wish the same things 
for the region: to bring the remaining countries into the West’s fold and keep 
them away from China and Russia; to facilitate their transition toward 
democracy, rule of law, and market economies; and, most importantly, to avoid 
the recurrence of the horrific conflicts that ravaged the region in the 1990s.

While both the EU and the United States have been concerningly derelict in 
their duties in the region, finger-pointing and wounded pride are not going to 
make the situation on the ground any better. That is why policymakers on both 
sides of the Atlantic ought to wish that the meeting today be a success and not 
another cringeworthy moment in the recent history of transatlantic relations.

Photograph of Aleksandar Vučić by by Ting Shen/Xinhua via Getty.

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"SERBIAN NEWS NETWORK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/senet/017701d682b0%24af7f2a50%240e7d7ef0%24%40gmail.com.

Reply via email to