Bilcik: The dialogue must continue; there is no Plan B; all other alternatives are tragic

Dialogue is the only way forward. So far, there hasn't been a clear link established between official Belgrade and what happened in Banjska, and calling for sanctions before the investigation is concluded is not a constructive way forward, just as criticizing EU reporters isn't, the EP rapporteur for Serbia, Vladimir Bilcik, says in an interview for Kosovo Online.

How should we continue, and is it possible to continue the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina?

There is no other way. We must continue the dialogue. There is no Plan B. We have always said that for all those involved in this issue, the only way forward in the relations between Belgrade and Pristina is through dialogue, and all other alternatives are tragic. We need to return to dialogue; everyone must be serious and committed to it; it is in the interest of all, especially the people in Kosovo and Metohija, both the Serbs and the Albanians. Otherwise, we will have a very different picture that none of us will like. Dialogue is the only way.

Some European Parliament members have called for sanctions against Serbia, and on Thursday, there is a session of the European Parliament. How do you view the events in Banjska?

You see, you are talking about two things. One is about the events in Banjska. What happened in Banjska was serious, and everyone in the European Parliament and other European institutions took it very seriously. It's crucial that we know all the facts, we need a clear and credible investigation into what happened, the delivery of justice, and lessons learned. What happened in Banjska is an example of what can happen when politics, dialogue, and communication fail us. And this is potentially very explosive, especially in the Western Balkans and especially when we talk about relations between Belgrade and Pristina. I will say very openly that before Banjska, many who closely follow the dialogue were very frustrated with Pristina and the fact that it was not committed, especially when it comes to the CSM. But after Banjska, all eyes are also on Belgrade, and we will pay attention to that in the resolution. We are preparing a resolution, and negotiating about it, all political groups have some texts, and in the end, we will have one text that will be in the European Parliament on Thursday. I don't know what the final version will be, but I would like to say two things. One is that restrictive measures will be addressed in the resolution, and there is no doubt about that. My feeling and my political group are in favor of adopting restrictive measures against Serbia and Belgrade only if a clear connection between the events in Banjska and the leadership in Belgrade is established. So far, this has not been established. The other thing is that the European Parliament will have a political resolution, but the decision on any measures against Belgrade is in the hands of EU member states and the Council, and I expect that something will be proposed by Borrell and his team. It's too early to say what will happen. We should get all the facts, ensure justice, and conduct the investigation in the best possible way, and also, timing is crucial.

On Sunday, it was four months since Serbian goods were banned in Kosovo. Also, the Jarinje crossing was closed for three weeks, forcing the Serbs from northern Kosovo to travel for over four hours to reach their jobs and homes. Can the EU do something about this issue?

If you read the draft resolution of my political group, we have also included a reference to the need for Pristina to implement its policy in line with the principles of open trade. This is something essential, and we will see what the final text will be. You are right, if the borders are closed, if there is no trade, it creates an insecure environment that pushes people and relationships into the gray zone. It increases the possibility of smuggling, and the natural need for certain necessities, and equipment related to the operation of schools and hospitals in northern Kosovo. The possibility of open trade is in the interest of a better quality of life, and all measures that prevent it punish people on the ground. This is an issue we need to address politically. It is not directly in line with the dialogue, but it is a broader issue that concerns all people in the Western Balkans to have a European perspective. Closed borders, hindering trade and connections, are entirely contrary to the European perspective.

How to proceed to elections - administratively as demanded by Pristina or through the resignation of mayors? Even if the mayors were to resign tomorrow, it wouldn't mean anything unless local councilors do the same.

This is something that people on the ground need to decide. The EU must play its role; we have been direct with Pristina. There must be a new process leading to new elections that can produce legitimate political representatives for the people living in northern Kosovo. We have been talking about this for months, and I understand that you are bringing up the question of let's do it quickly, but it has its history. It takes two to tango. The last time, the Serbs didn't want to participate in the elections, and now they are ready to hold them tomorrow. If the policy is implemented correctly, it must be based on certain rules. I welcome the fact that the Serbs are ready to participate in the elections; people should choose their mayors and councilors they can address, rather than having mayoral offices surrounded by armed forces. That's not democracy, and the quality of democracy is extremely low. How can we reach the elections now? It must be based on mutual understanding between Pristina and the Serbs in Kosovo. Elections cannot become a new source of conflict and tension. I hope that there can be a good and fast way for Pristina to hold new elections, but it must be based on a process. Maybe overnight resignations or a longer process that might eventually produce more credible results. I don't know; I don't have a recipe for what should happen. The only thing I know is that it must happen based on understanding. When the Serbs are now ready for elections, that's great news, and I hope the same is true for Pristina because when there is a plan, it's not so important whether it's a matter of days, weeks, or months; what matters is that there is an understanding that at the end of the process, there will be a government that people can trust, and it won't be captive to one side or subject to measures like the heavy presence of Security Forces around the mayor's offices. That is unacceptable. The de-escalation process is when both sides move forward.

Kurti and Osmani have repeatedly called for sanctions against Serbia before resuming dialogue, and there has been a lot of criticism directed at Lajcak and Borrell from Pristina. How do you view this?

As I said, there is only one way forward, and that is through dialogue. If there are many criticisms towards Lajcak and Borrell, I don't believe that's a constructive approach to the dialogue, which we need. The EU is there to oversee the process, but ultimately it is up to Pristina and Belgrade to reach an agreement, and it is crucial for the local population to be in line with the agreement. Attacks on EU negotiators do not help. There is no Plan B, no alternative, and avoiding the real question of how to reach a solution. Again, the issue of sanctions is in the hands of EU member states, and I am sure there will be a clear message from the European Parliament. My position and the position of my group are that all restrictive measures must be based on facts. We do not have all the facts at this time. We cannot turn sanctions into political statements. Frankly, Serbia has already received a portion of sanctions in terms of a loss of trust, credibility, and sympathy around the dialogue because of Banjska. I don't think it was in anyone's interest in Belgrade who is committed to the dialogue for Banjska to happen. It cost Belgrade a lot of credibility. That's where we are politically today. Calling for sanctions while the investigation is ongoing is not a constructive way forward, but at the same time, it is essential for Belgrade to provide a clear and open investigation into what happened in Banjska, for justice to be delivered, and for lessons to be learned from this. We shouldn't escalate tensions; the temperature is already too high for people on the ground, and that needs to change.