Belgrade’s Dilemma: Kosovo or “Europe”
by Srdja Trifkovic
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].
A month has passed since the parliamentary election of May 11, and Serbia is still without a new government. The new National Assembly was convened briefly on May 10, while the Municipal Council of Belgrade remains paralyzed for at least another month. A new general election, some time in early fall, may prove to be the only way out of the current imbroglio, although no major political party or leader wants to admit that much in public.
For a country like Italy in the 1960s and 1970s, it was perfectly tolerable to have weak and unstable governments that rise and fall every other month because the society could continue to function regardless of what happened in Rome. For Serbia, pressured from all sides, effectively bankrupt, and saddled with the unresolved crisis over Kosovo’s status, a protracted political imbroglio is an unaffordable luxury.
Another election seems to be the preferred scenario of the “pro-European” coalition let by the Democratic Party (Demokratska stranka, DS) of President Boris Tadic. The DS and its foreign handlers in Brussels and Washington are pleased with its election results. They expect that in another election the DS would increase its share of the vote and thereby create conditions to take power all by itself, or perhaps in coalition with the like-minded, stridently anti-nationalist, pro-Western Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) led by the NED favorite, Cedomir Jovanovic. This may explain the refusal of President Tadic and his allies even to contemplate the possibility of any alternative outcome—such as a “national” government led by the outgoing Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica—to the current political and constitutional paralysis gripping Serbia.
The outcome of ongoing negotiations aimed at forming the new government is still in doubt, although it looks like the Socialist Party (SPS) and its two smaller allies will join the DS camp, contrary to the wishes of their voters and party rank-and-file. Tadic knows, however, that even if he woos the Socialist Party into his camp, the resulting coalition would not be a stable and enduring one. Tadic is still trying hard to win over to his side the Socialist leader, Ivica Dacic, and—especially—his two smaller allies, Dragan Marković a.k.a. “Palma” (JS) and the party of retirees (PUPS). But if the ploy does not work, the alternative DS scenario is to engineer a protracted political and constitutional crisis that would last through the summer. and result in another election in late September or early October.
The Radicals (SRS), led by Tomislav Nikolic, and the Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) of the current Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica, appear unable to develop a counter-strategy that would preempt Tadic’s win-win scenario. They have reached an agreement with the Socialists on sharing power in the City of Belgrade, but even there the outgoing DS-controlled administration has imposed insurmountable roadblocks: the acting DS mayor has set the date for the constitutive City assembly for July 14, obviously hoping that the putative governing coalition in the City Hall can be somehow subverted or sabotaged in the meantime.
It is noteworthy that these games, deeply detrimental to the democratic process, are being played by the party that had spent years demanding “democratic reforms”—although such games are far more reminiscent of the style of governance of Slobodan Milosevic and his cohorts in the 1990s. The ability to accept peaceful change of government in accordance with the clearly defined and universally accepted rules of the game is the basic test of democratic maturity. Over the past month the Democratic Party, and President Boris Tadic personally, have flunked it.
“EUROPE” OR KOSOVO?—The main point of contention is the attitude of different parties to the issue of “European integration” in the light of Kosovo’s unilateral proclamation of independence on February 17 and the subsequent recognition of that illegal act by 20 of the 27 member countries of the European Union. The proponents of Euro-integration at any cost claim that this process is not connected with the issue of Kosovo, that a “dual-track” policy is both possible and desirable. The issue came to a head over the ratification of the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) between Serbia and the EU that was signed by Deputy Prime Minister Bozidar Djelic (DS) in Luxembourg just before the election, and is now due for parliamentary ratification.
Legal experts belonging to the DSS published a lengthy analysis of the Agreement on May 5, and concluded that the SAA cannot be given to parliament for ratification in its current form. According to Simic, one of the authors of the legal analysis of the SAA, ” in this form, and at this phase of adoption, the Agreement cannot even be annulled because it is devoid of the fundamental premise” for a contract to exist in a legally binding form—an agreement of intent and an agreement on the meaning of terms between the signatories.
What this means is that Serbian officials believe the agreement with the EU it relates to the whole country—even though it does not apply to Kosovo, at least for the time being—while 20 EU member-states that have recognized Kosovo’s unilateral independence believe that the SAA relates to the Republic of Serbia, that is, rump Serbia without Kosovo. Therefore, according to Simic, “there is no agreement as to who the sides are in the agreement or what they represent: we consider Serbia to mean its entire territory as defined by the UN Charter and the Constitution, while 20 EU countries believe that Serbia is a country without Kosovo.”
Article 135 of the SAA that referred to Kosovo’s status in terms of Resolution 1244 had not been problematic until Kosovo declared independence, and until that illegal act was recognized by 20 EU member-states. Now it presents a huge problem, because Article 135 of the Agreement states that the SAA does not apply to Kosovo, which is under international administration under Resolution 1244, and furthermore that “Kosovo’s current status is not brought into question.” From the legal point of view, it is evident that there is no “harmony of intent” between the parties and that, subsequently, the SAA is legally invalid.
If the SAA were sent to the National Assembly for ratification, Serbia would thereby effectively recognize Kosovo’s independence. Each vote for ratification of the SAA would be in flagrant violation of the fundamental provisions of the country’s Constitution which relate to the protection of Serbia’s territorial integrity—which would be a serious crime: a blatant violation of the Constitution. On the other hand, Serbia would have to violate the SAA in its present form in order to respect its own Constitution.
One of the key pillars of the SAA is the insistence on “regional cooperation.” If Serbia were to ratify the SAA in its current form, it would have to cooperate with all independent countries in the region and that means even Kosovo, according to the thinking of the 20 EU countries that have recognized that putative state. And if a government in Belgrade agrees to cooperate with an independent Kosovo, it would be violating a fundamental provision of its Constitution and disqualify itself from the right to govern.
The rhetoric of President Boris Tadic and his allies continues to promise the squaring of the circle: maintaining Serbia’s claim Kosovo on the one hand, but getting ever closer to the European Union on the other. This is, by now, palpably an impossibility. All key EU leaders have stated, in one form or another, that Serbia would have to chose between retaining its assertion of sovereignty over Kosovo and continuing the process of European integration.
Most Serbs believe that European integration would be good for the country, and generally speaking, the majority look favourably on the EU. At the same time, an even greater majority still believe that Kosovo is an inalienable part of Serbia and that there can be no compromise on this fundamental issue. In various polls, most Serbs have said that they would not give up the title to Kosovo in return for the accelerated prospect of EU membership. This is confirmed in the results of the latest general election: the parties that have campaigned on the “sovereignist” platform (SRS, DSS-NS, SPS and its allies) have polled the majority of seats, subsequent games and shinenigans notwithstanding.
Even if there is yet another election in late September or early October, the voters’ dilemma will remain fundamentally the same: Serbia is forced by Brussels and Washington to choose between preserving the valid title to Kosovo, and joining “Europe” on Western terms—which demands the quiet acceptance of the amputation of Kosovo at first, followed by explicit recognition later. If the EU persists in replacing the United Nations in Kosovo with its own illegal EULEX mission—and Brussels will continue the pressure to that end after June 15—we’ll have another clear sign that the conditions for Serbia’s EU aspirations are not only futile but also demeaning and degrading.
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].
1 Comment by james on 12 June 2008:
Has Serbia passed the NGO law yet?
Is there a main NGO that runs the affairs in Serbia like Carneige Endowment for Democracy in Russia which Human Rights Watch also runs through?
Where do political parties in Serbia recieve there funding from?
Do crime bosses that operate in Serbia have there base in Pristina?
2 Comment by Swede on 12 June 2008:
I think Serbia must protest against the bad treatment from the EU. Serbia could sign the SAA agreement and at the same time send troops to northern Kosovo in case EULEX tries to violate 1244. The Netherlands said they will block ratification of the SAA agreement anyway so it doesn’t matter if Serbia signs it or not.
Another way to fight is for civilian Kosovo Serbs to set up “spontaneous” ambushes for EULEX troops. That way Serbia would not need to be involved. But they could still help unofficially by sending equipment and provide proper training. This is the way rebels in Iraq and Afghanistan are winning against a much stronger enemy. It is a cheap tactic but it has proven itself in the fields.
3 Comment by Robert Borne on 12 June 2008:
NGO’s work like this too. Ok you’re president say of the u.s. so your whole family has formed shell corporations or LLC’s in case there’s a catastrophy somehwere, a quake, flood, tidal wave etc. It’s an NGO – “non-government organziation” … and when the victim or afflicted country wishes to accept aid (from the u.s. taxpayer) your brother gets (from the federal treasury, in a round about way thru yourself the president) $12Million deposited to his LLC i.e. NGO to buy the needed supplies. He buys $10Million worth and keeps $2Million for the LLC or NGO (operating expenses, etc.) And times that, by however many people are in the family and have formed their NGO’s.
It’s why when recently Burma’s junta after their crisis (what was it a tidal wave or typhoon or both) wouldn’t let all of the u.s. NGO’s do their thing by sending in aid & everyone was screaming. Imagine your whole family each with its own LLC or NGO wanting to get their $12Million from the Govt. (from the u.s. taxpayer) to send their $10Million of aid (and pocket their $2Million) screaming their heads off… that dirty junta – why won’t they let us send aid.
So if I’m (seriously) ever president and this is still the system of finance and govt. I want everyone on this site to immediately form their LLC’s i.e. NGO’s … each and every one of you – so in times of trouble when we have justification to dip into the u.s. treasury at the expense of all of us taxpayers – you, my friends, will benefit and not all of the NGO’s of my enemies. See how they work?!
4 Comment by Michael Averko on 12 June 2008:
The article’s title appropriately has Europe in quotations.
5 Comment by Tomislav Milosevic on 12 June 2008:
So everybody needs more Vaseline.
Buy stocks low, sell high.
6 Comment by Iliya Pavlovich on 12 June 2008:
Almost like offering the USA with or wthout Alaska. What an absurd thought. I can’t translate it for our American born countrymen. It’s a typical Balkan quagmaire. Every 45 to 55 years some new Bismarck or Coburg-Gotha comes to power aided by some new Habsburg and pronounces the Serbian death.
The miracle is that some Serbians actually take it for granted while some small minority retains to right to sound reasoning. If you’re Serbian just think of Radoje Domanovic. In simpler terms Serbia will go to the highest bidder, no matter what nationality or religion. We (Serbians) are too much accustomed to following “that the might is right” so we’ll sign a Molotov deal with the Satan incarnate just to remove the short term pain of waiting for visas at foreign embasssies. I am terribly pesimistic (as if I didn’t make it obvious enough in the prior lines. Good luck “rent-a-Serbian” and the other kinds of Jugend. Again, I applaud Dr. T. for his fantabulous insight, speed and accuracy. I wish I had half of it.
7 Comment by Patrick Hall on 12 June 2008:
It is sad to see that Serbia is still trying to function as a “liberal democracy” with all of it’s political party warfare.
Indeed, Mr Trifkovic, this “protracted political imbroglio is an unaffordable luxury.” Does it occur to the Serbian people at all that it is time they forgo their attachment to “liberal democracy” (which was exemplified by the Milosevic regime) and try something old? Is there any chance of the Serbians clamoring for a traditional hereditary monarch? What is the general feeling, from on the ground, of the Crown Prince Alexander II?
Or, are the people dead-set in Party Politics?
8 Comment by Alex on 13 June 2008:
You know, what struck me most about this is Dr. Trifkovic’s term, “joining “Europe” on Western terms.” It harkens back to the Serbs (and other Balkan Orthodox) Byzantine ancestors, who were given the choice of “Union” of the Churches (on Western Terms) or being left to our fate with the Turks. Having been stabbed in the back by the Western Crusaders in 1204, we chose a fate under the Turks. We got 500 years of neglect and and abuse under Turkish rule. Which was worse? I am glad we opted to preserve our Orthodox identity, but what the cost?
Is it the same now? I wonder. Inclusion and Amputation vs. Exclusion and Amputation.
9 Comment by Grumpy Old Man on 13 June 2008:
Let us hope that little Ireland puts paid (at least for a time) to the helotization of all Europe.
Serbia needs a Tsar and to exile all the subservient liberal democrats, then a strategy for thumbing its nose at the EU, the belated manifestation of Napoleon and Hitler’s political dreamscapes.
10 Comment by james on 13 June 2008:
@6Iliya Pavlovich
Funny you should mention Alaska as there is a separatist movement in Alaska wanting to be independent from the US http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/104960-0/ although its probably pretty small.
I dont know the exact history of Kosovo as regards to Serbia but the same rationale for giving it independence can be used against the US as large chunks of her territory were bought from foreign countries. Russia sold Alaska to the US and France sold New Orleans (I think it was New Orleans) to fund the Napoleonic wars. Isn’t there even a case that the US fought Mexico to incorporate Texas into the US. Although today it probably looks more Mexican than European- American.
11 Comment by Swede on 13 June 2008:
#10 james, there are separatist movements in California too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Republic
The peace treaty with the Lakota indians (Fort Laramie treaty) have been annulled as of December 17 2007 and the Lakota Indians now demand their own “Repbublic of Lakota”:
http://www.republicoflakotah.com/
Using Kosovo as precedent it would effectively leave the United States without both Californa and Lakota territory (stretching out over 11 states).
But the U.S. policy is not known for being universal. It only applies to places where the U.S. have something to gain.
12 Comment by Swede on 13 June 2008:
#10 james, there are separatist movements in California too:
hxxp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Republic
The peace treaty with the Lakota indians (Fort Laramie treaty) have been annulled as of December 17 2007 and the Lakota Indians now demand their own “Repbublic of Lakota”:
hxxp://www.republicoflakotah.com/
Using Kosovo as precedent it would effectively leave the United States without both Californa and Lakota territory (stretching out over 11 states).
But the U.S. policy is not known for being universal. It only applies to places where the U.S. have something to gain.
13 Comment by Michael Thomas on 13 June 2008:
Mr Trifkovic
Serbia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is not decided by the EU. While it would be unwise to ratify the SAA in Parliament, this act itself would not amount to Serbia’s surrender of Kosovo.
Serbia can surrender Kosovo only at the UN, and that is something even Tadic hesitates to do.
The EU is by no means an economic success story and the threat it poses to civil liberties (as explained in your article a few days ago) leads me to believe that Serbia would do well to keep out of it. I know this is not the view of most Serbians, but they know very little about the EU.
If the SAA is ratified by the Serbian Parliament, one of the next steps will be for the EU to demand that Serbia recognises and respects its neighbours, including Albanian-dominated Kosovo. If Serbia refuses, then its entry to the EU may be blocked indefinitely.
It will be no bad thing if the Kosovo issue remains as a constant barrier to Serbia’s EU membership.
What we are seeing today is Kosovo saving Serbia from making the disastrous decision to join the EU.
14 Comment by Michael Kenny on 13 June 2008:
A lawyer’s point: if the decision setting up EULEX is illegal, as Dr Trifkovic believes, then it will be annulled by the EU Court of Justice. Someone just has to go to court! I’m constantly struck by people of all political persuasions screaming “illegal, illegal, illegal!”, but carefully avoiding going to court. Of course, an unsubstianted claim of illegality is more useful as a smear than going to court and losing (US Supreme Court of yesterday!) …
15 Comment by Iliya Pavlovich on 13 June 2008:
Once upon a time there was an Austrian national who gained prominence within Germany in the early 1930s (his accomplishments were the Krystallnacht, the Night of the Long Knives, the Reichstag Fire, the agreement with Molotov and Chamberlain) but preceeding all those events he took to the “information highway” by virtue of the Volkisher Beobachter. The British Ambasador to Serbia, Leutenant of the Victorian Order Wordsworth has been active in “helping Serbia join the EU” – irrespective if that is good or not good for Serbia. This almost unprecedanted inovlvment of a foreign diplomat into the affairs of the host country. Read more about it: http://www.politika.co.yu/rubrike/Politika/Ne-pravim-vladu-samo-razgovaram.sr.html
Just yesterday the Politika daily had been given a new iron fist to govern the news more efficiently – hence the mention of a similar event in Weimar Republic.
16 Comment by Hunter Haynes on 13 June 2008:
Dr. Trifkovic,
True to form, you clearly explained the political climate in Belgrade and the legal considerations surrounding Kosovo.
I have just returned from a three week visit to Kosovo. (We met briefly in Belgrade, after the May 9th “Kosovo Crisis” lecture.)
As I made my way from one Serbian enclave to another, I became more enraged … not just with the US/Western-Albanian agenda that spawned such a crisis … but with Belgrade.
Why is Kosovo’s “declaration of independence” not considered an “act of war” by even the most pro-Western politicians in Serbia? Serbia’s citizens are being systematically erased, along with her Churches. Can the allure of EU membership be so enticing, as to drown out the cries of the Serbs – living and dead – in Kosovo? Call me a sentimentalist, but a government that fails to protect ALL its citizens and territory from the “Dangers of Invasion from without, and Convulsions within” is not worthy of the position.
The orgy of tawdry development throughout the region – funded by the illegal activities of the Albanian Mafia and the money of arrogant Western investors – was completely revolting. Especially when one contrasts this “New Kosova” to the living conditions of the non-people – the isolated Serbs.
Yet there is hope for the Serbs of Kosovo:
First, they have not completely abandoned God – which is more than I can say for many in Belgrade, Europe and the US.
Second, the incompetence and shortsightedness of the West remains unchanged. Perhaps, the hundreds of British KFOR soldiers currently massing in the area of Mitrovica will do the one thing that COULD unite all the Serbs … attack the Serbs in North Mitrovica. That action, or a similar action like the Pogrom of 2004, just might force the hand of those in Belgrade. Many in Kosovo, believe that such an incident will happen this summer, before the UN meets in September. We shall see.
Best regards,
Hunter Haynes
17 Comment by Allen Wilson on 13 June 2008:
What is the likelihood that all this Kosovo business is a game being played by DC to manoeuvre the Serbs into a political (and eventually economic) confrontation which will force them to resort to war? Should we be looking for a fort Sumter event or a new Gulf of Tonkin within the next few months or years? A puppet Serb government would be the best thing to ensure the safety of an American oil pipeline across the Balkans, thus the political machinations? This time the victim has a big brother who may not jump to assist right away, but will do so if his hand is forced as it was in 1914.
It’s a little late for the bigwigs to be doing this as their evil empire is crumbling and on the verge of collapse. Serbia will be a free nation after the evil empire is gone.
18 Comment by Kirt Higdon on 13 June 2008:
#9 – Looks like little Ireland did it. I’m wearing something green today.
19 Comment by Bill Wilder on 13 June 2008:
Mr. Higdon,
You’re right. The Irish rejected the Lisbon Treaty.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7452171.stm
Now we wonder if they have to vote “until they get it right.”
20 Comment by Eagle on 13 June 2008:
Mr Wislon @13,
An oil pipeline is only a tangential reason for Balkan gamesmanship. The real reason is a provocation of Russia. The US wishes to see no integrated contenental Europe, which is why it continues to occupy it within the framework of a “defensive alliance” (NATO) and start many fires burning such that it can swoop in and help “resolve” them. Just as is the case with Iraq, the current US government interests do not lie in achieving any sort of peace or stability in either the Middle East or the Balkans. They are “useful” hotspots for power politics to play out. Should the Germans come to their senses and cease playing their own ridculous games vis-a-vis Serbia, then we could well see peace and stability in the Balkans. However, a Germany that has come to its sense, would cooperate with Russia and France to unify continental Europe, create the greatest military and economic block in the world, and not only end US-UK hegemony in the Balkans, but everywhere.
21 Comment by Trifkovic on 13 June 2008:
Mr Haynes: nothing to add — you are 100% spot on
22 Comment by Rory on 13 June 2008:
Firstly the leadership class of Washington are the same kind of well heeled elites that run every other government, business, church, school and NGO throughout the west. Rather than their predecessors natural patriotism, this new leadership class is dissident to their own populations, and are a traitor class. Secondly, apart from Russia and Serbia which part of continental Europe aren’t yet unified (or on the road to being so)in the transnational bloc called the EU? Washington is broadly supportive of EU expansion, because the “transies” of both Washington and Brussels, don’t believe in borders, language or culture. Remember Marx believed in “FreeTrade” because it destroyed national boundaries and intensified the struggle between labor and capital. Sound familiar EU, NAFTA? Also the US views the EU as a harmless Disneyland. A nice place to visit (for now) but no serious threat as a military alliance or as an economic power. There is simply nothing in the cards to render the EU a competitor to the US because Europeans are choosing extinction rather than sacrifice and honor (the strength of the EURO notwithstanding). However a reawakened neo-czarist Russia does pose a serious threat because unlike the leadership class of the US,NATO, EU, the Russian leaders see themselves thus, “Two Romes have fallen. The third stands. And there will be no fourth.” Russia is going to hold on to what is left of its empire come hell or high water. NATO and EU expansion similarly crashed upon the bulwark called Serbia, which is why it had to be dismembered. Its history and culture has produced leaders that haven’t been willing to become proxies of great powers like their neighbors have. It wasn’t by accident that J.R.R. Tolkien named the mythical Minas Tirith “The White City” after Belgrade. Pace Dr. T, a new Northern Alliance is required if we are to survive the unholy alliance of cultural marxists and jihadists. However I believe it will take the form of non-state actors, for all the reasons I mentioned above vis a vis the leadership class. Serbia has been for sometime an inconvenient nation to the great powers. This time around it was sacrificed to curry favor in the Islamic world. I am in complete solidarity with you Serbia!
23 Comment by dragan on 13 June 2008:
Ireland said No!Agreement from Nice is still in charge,so the SAA is ampty piece of paper not just for Serbia but,also,for Croatia or any other nation who would like to join EUSSSR!Besides Serbia,Ireland will be an inconvenient nation for sometimes to the great demonocrators from Brussels!This is a painful news for Belgrade’s unionist & senor Solana & co!At last a good news!
24 Comment by Dragan Dimitrijevic on 14 June 2008:
@ Hunter Haynes
What good would Serbia’s rage do ? Last time Serbia sent troops to Kosovo all of Serbia (and Montenegro) got bombed by NATO.
Americans should get enraged over the crimes committed by their own government instead. That might be more effective…
25 Comment by Tomislav Milosevic on 15 June 2008:
ok
as usual I say: Serbia does as Serbia does.
Predict?
Guess?
Wish?
Forget it. Get to top of the page.
Kostunica, putanica, whatever.
Get it?
I know you don’t.
Stay tuned.
26 Comment by Tomislav Milosevic on 15 June 2008:
Sorry Srdja, I had to do it
27 Comment by Sean Scallon on 16 June 2008:
Dr. Trifkovic could you please explain what has happened in the last few weeks and months that is leading the SPS towards a deal with Tadic when in your last posting on the Serbian election you seemed fairly confident the SPS would reject Tadic?
28 Comment by Trifkovic on 16 June 2008:
The answer is simple: Tadic & Co. can offer more MONEY to the principals. The SPS Old Guard (Prof. Mihailo Markovic, former FM Z. Jovanovic et al) has warned Dacic that a deal with the DS would divide and destroy the party. He doesn’t seem to care, however: if this one-time deal nets him a nice seven-figure sum, he’ll go for it. Needless to say, his coalition partners — especially Mr. “Palma” the mafioso — are eager to make a deal with Tadic.
29 Comment by Tomislav Milosevic on 16 June 2008:
Clear and present.
So SM can spin his bones in his pet cemetery grave along with ancestors of many of us.
Wild card is still Serbia itself. As always. I believe so after Ottomans, Habsburgs, Broz, Brussels………….
It’s the only card left anyway.
Let’s see if it’s also for sale.
30 Comment by Leo on 16 June 2008:
The EU is and always has been part of the American projection of American “multiculturalism”. The endless meddling to get Turkey admitted(just advocated again this week) is the coup de main of our anti-Christian elites to deliberately overrun Europe with Muslims.I can cite countless other actions-the basically American war on Serbia was openly advocated as a chance to kill Christians on behalf of Moslems.OPENLY ADVOCATED.The American Empire is militarily and financially exhausted.I believe the elite’s obsession with Obama is an attempt to seduce the world with a gimmick.We have a man of color as president,therefore we are still the rightful rulers of this “multicultural” world.This joke may run a few months(if the big O is elected)but the only lasting consequence will a further decline in real power.If Europe,or parts of Europe,and Russia want to stand up to the US and Brussels they can kick in a rotting door.But that’s as they say still an “if”.