Demands of 56 parliamentarians for a tougher approach towards Belgrade - belated letter of limited scope

Writing for Kosovo Online: Dragan Bisenic, journalist

The letter addressed to the representatives of the EU and the USA participating in the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina is interesting because of its layers and the different messages it sends to Ukraine and the Balkans. First of all, it is a letter signed by 56 parliamentarians from Great Britain, the Baltic States, and a limited number of members of the German Bundestag who originate from Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, led by the President of the Committee, Michael Roth. Among the authors are the presidents of the foreign affairs committee of the British House of Commons and the parliaments of the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Ireland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. With them is the chairman of the Foreign Policy Committee of the US Senate, Bob Menendez. The basic demands of the letter are a more critical attitude towards the President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic, and too much leniency towards Belgrade.

They say that "the current approach does not work", and "demand that the international community learn from our past and ensure that we do not lead a policy centered on Belgrade in the Balkans." "It is necessary to "reconsider" this approach," they underlined, and called for "a return to balance and proportionality in dealing with Kosovo and Serbia."

They also call for "the policy of deterrence diplomacy to be considered in order to prevent further deterioration of the security situation in the north of Kosovo" and say that "those who stand for the rule of law and democracy should not be punished".

The signatories of the letter conclude that Kosovo is a "sovereign country and a functional democracy" and that this "fact should be the basis of a common policy towards the current crisis".

The letter, if judged by the number and representation of signatories of British origin, which is indicated by the fact that the first signatory is the president of the British Committee for Foreign Policy, Alicia Kearns, who recently caused odium in the Serbian public when she announced that Serbian priests and medical personnel were smuggling weapons to Kosovo.

Based on this, it seems that it is an attempt by British parliamentary politics to establish itself and be included in the negotiation process between Belgrade and Pristina, which has only the European Union and the USA as external actors. The European Union is the immediate bearer of the dialogue, and the USA is the main assistant "from the shadows" who often plays an important, and even more often decisive, role in this dialogue. There is no place for Great Britain anywhere. Great Britain is no longer a member of the European Union in order for its views to be included in the views of the EU, and its orientation towards the Ukrainian conflict left almost no room for dealing with other issues such as, for example, the Kosovo issue. Great Britain has a historical place and historical role in Balkan politics, so it is hard to deny that Great Britain still wants to preserve these historical pledges, in addition to the forces that are undoubtedly more dominant in the Balkans at the moment, such as the EU and the USA.

In terms of effective policy, this letter is of limited scope and is quite late since the crisis in Kosovo started more than two months ago and its character has been declared by all subjects involved in its resolution - from Secretary of State Blinken, through the special envoys of the USA and EU, to US congressmen and senators.

The true parliamentary position was expressed by several delegations of US congressmen and senators who stayed in Kosovo and the region from then until today. The US Congress is preparing the Law on the Development and Democratization of the Western Balkans, which is supported by both parties, which is why there are frequent delegations from Capitol Hill visiting the Balkans. So far, several hearings have been held on this topic. None of the delegations that visited the region in the last two months failed to emphasize Pristina's overwhelming responsibility for the confrontational direction these events took, which is quite different from what this letter advocates. The letter was not signed by the two senators who are the most prominent policy bearers of the US Congress in the Balkans, Senator Jeanne Shaheen and Senator Chris Murphy. Senator Shaheen believes that the formation of the Community of Serb-majority Municipalities is necessary, while Senator Chris Murphy harshly criticized Albin Kurti at the end of May and stated that his actions unnecessarily endangered US troops and other NATO forces in Kosovo and Metohija because Kurti's decisions "in the north of Kosovo and Metohija in the last 30 days have put US and NATO troops in unnecessary danger". Washington asked the question whether Kurti was a partner or not and is still looking for an answer to that question, and until then it warns that it would apply "responsibility" for what was done, not sanctions. “If the government in Pristina wants to start conflicts, we as the Congress have to make a decision whether we are ready to support it," Senator Murphy said.

Basically, the whole concept of the letter is a sublimation and representation of the views that were already expressed by the Prime Minister of Kosovo, Albin Kurti.

Some commentators have assessed that it is particularly significant that among the signatories is the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada, Oleksandr Merezhko, and that Ukraine is the most important country among the signatories of the letter because the recognition of Ukraine would "serve" that the five countries of the European Union that do not recognize Kosovo change attitude.

Merezhko is a respected international lawyer from Zelenskyy's party, who met with the President of Kosovo in June.

The intonation of his statement, which he later gave, explaining the Ukrainian position, indicates rather that he is trying to emerge from the whirlpool into which he was thrown by the necessary allies of his country in the conflict with Russia, trying to reconcile the interests of the allies, but also the awareness that the support for the principles based on which the statehood of Kosovo should be created is the path to the destruction of Ukrainian statehood. That's why Merezhko says that the recognition of Kosovo's independence is still a disputed matter in Ukraine, that he himself only represents "parliamentary diplomacy" and that he "doesn't have the whole picture" of all the circumstances. He, therefore, pointed out that "there are still discussions" and that "it is not an easy thing" because "there are advantages and disadvantages".

The President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic, said that if Ukraine recognized Kosovo's independence, it would "lose everything it had in its hands" in one day.

"After that, how can Ukraine say that it adheres to international public law? I am convinced that Zelenskyy (Volodymyr, President of Ukraine) will not let go of that trump card," Vucic said.

The authors and signatories of the letter are actually the logistics of the ideas of Kosovo Prime Minister Albin Kurti. He repeated countless times that Kosovo was the most democratic country in the Balkans and that sanctions should be imposed on Serbia because Serbia was a pro-Russian branch, while Kosovo was on the side of the West and on the side of Ukraine. "Serbia has not imposed sanctions on the Russian Federation and finances the fascist militia in the northern part of my country, so maybe they should be sanctioned," Kurti once again repeated the accusations against Serbia.

"Again, in that sense, Serbia is like Russia, but their danger to us does not turn into fear of them, but into additional efforts for development and democracy," Kurti said. According to him, Kosovo is "a democratic republic that is according to all international organizations regarding the rule of law, media freedom, human rights and the fight against corruption, the first among the six countries in the Western Balkans".

"Official Belgrade should blame the two of them for the situation they and we are in," Kurti urged. In addition, last year he requested that Serbia be condemned for not imposing sanctions on Russia.

The Prime Minister of Kosovo called the President of Serbia "little Putin", and once again repeated that Serbia was a threat to the region.

"With Putin's friend in Republika Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the little Serbian Putin, peace and security in the Western Balkans have never been more threatened," Kurti said, adding that the tactics of "staging events and attacks to blame the other side in the region have been seen."

Reflecting the Ukrainian conflict on Kosovo and vice versa does not give Ukraine an advantage. US officials were aware of this when they explained on numerous occasions that Kosovo was a "sui generis" case, precisely in order to avoid providing arguments to the Russian cause in Ukraine. Perhaps this connection is accidental, but if it is not, then the West is testing the applicability of a new approach to ending the conflict in Ukraine since there is more and more intense talk about the fact that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy himself spoke about ending the conflict and that there is a frequent diplomatic activity of possible mediators - from Kissinger in China to the recently concluded meeting in Riyadh. All this was the opening slogan for the announced visit of Stuart Peach to Belgrade, whom the signatories also addressed as the recipient of the letter, equal to Lajcak and Escobar, and Borrell, so there will obviously be a lot to talk about at those meetings.