Sljuka: With his statement about the opening of the bridge, Lajcak tried to encourage Pristina to engage in dialogue

Aleksandar Sljuka, a collaborator with the NGO "New Social Initiative" from North Mitrovica, tells Kosovo Online that it is possible that the EU Special Envoy for the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue, Miroslav Lajcak, made his statement about the EU supporting the opening of the Ibar Bridge in coordination with international partners in an attempt to persuade the authorities in Pristina to come to the table and continue the dialogue.

"Regarding Lajcak's statement that they support the opening of the bridge but that it should be done in consultation with the Kosovo government and international partners, the problem is that he excludes mentioning dialogue, that is, the idea that this should be done within the framework of dialogue, in cooperation with representatives of the local community. This was brought up in some meetings we have had on this matter in recent weeks," Sljuka said.

He explained the specific conditions under which the opening of the bridge could function.

"It is important that the opening of the bridge would be supported by international actors. However, this can only happen at a time when we have legitimate local authorities here in the north, specifically in North Mitrovica, who can represent the community. Then a memorandum of understanding should be signed, demarcating the boundary between North and South Mitrovica, and only then should the bridge be opened with the consent of both Belgrade and the local community," our interlocutor explained.

Given that Lajcak omitted this narrative, Sljuka believes it could mean two things.

"First, it could just be an awkward statement, which is unlikely. Second, it could be a targeted statement intended to encourage leaders in Pristina to become more actively involved in the dialogue. We know that Lajcak has had problems in recent months trying to engage the authorities in Pristina in dialogue. Vjosa Osmani even refused to meet with him, saying she had a busy schedule, but she recently declined a meeting with Lajcak. Kurti is also refusing to meet with Lajcak. The only one who has met with him is Bislimi. Because of all this, the meeting at the level of the main negotiators was not organized. It is difficult for Lajcak to get the negotiators to sit at the table, so he is making statements aimed at encouraging them," Sljuka believes.

He also adds that we should take into account the statements from some MPs and members of Self-Determination who believe that Lajcak is biased.

"They do not see him as having the necessary capability to lead this dialogue. Lajcak needs concrete results, but he is now especially in a crisis. Although in previous years we had crisis management, there were some solutions from that crisis management. However, in recent months there have been crises that have not been specifically resolved. There were many meetings regarding the issue of the dinar, but it was not resolved in the end. We are moving on to new issues, new problems are arising, and the previous ones have not been solved. Whether this will now encourage the government in Pristina to give the green light for them to proceed with opening the bridge on the Ibar, we will see. Although Lajcak's statement was problematic, he did say that this should be done in coordination with international partners," Sljuka said.

In this regard, he reminds that this is why KFOR and the Carabinieri are currently present on the bridge in increased numbers.

"I think it is hard to expect that Kurti will confront members of the international community to such an extent that he would forcibly open the bridge while KFOR troops are on it. That scenario seems unlikely to me, but it also seems unlikely that anything will come out of this upcoming meeting. The fact that no one is giving it much significance shows the state of the dialogue. Solutions have been absent for a long time, and they likely won't appear even after this meeting. This is a formality that Lajcak has to fulfill as a special envoy. We know that his mandate lasts until January. He has to leave some results behind, but it is hard to imagine that being possible in this situation," Sljuka concluded.