Warns former ambassador of NATO: Transaction of territories can cause war

Below, you have a full text:

Kosovo-Serbia divide could cause new conflicts in Balkans

An exchange of territories between Kosovo and Serbia could trigger a chain and instability response across the Balkans, and the West should open its eyes to the devastating consequences that this could bring.

Last year, the American Republican, who has been accused of being “the preferred Putin Resolution”, Dana Rohrabacher, sent a letter to Serbia's president, urging the Serbian leadership to consider exchanging territories with Kosovo.

At that moment, it seemed like a bad joke made by someone who did not understand the history and complexity of the Balkans.

Even though Rohrabacher's proposal was condemned by politicians throughout the region, this controversial congresswoman made public what many in Belgrade (and perhaps in Pristina) have in mind.

Today, Rohrabacher's proposal is approaching a reality. The stage for it has become almost ready, and new negotiations on Kosovo's “future on” seem almost inevitable.

Serbian President Aleksandar Vuciq wants a historic agreement with Kosovo. His partner in dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, mediated by the EU, President Hashim Thaci, is not so sincere, but he has never fully rejected the idea of redefining borders.

The Serbian Commission Association Act, which will represent the interest of Serbs in Kosovo, a powerful political weapon in Belgrade's hands or Pristina “macth, as some call it, will likely end by August.

Many are concerned that negotiations on the long-awaited status will serve as a precondition for regulating a territorial exchange.

No wonder Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik likes the plan, as it seeks a greater opportunity for himself.

Former co-workers of President Donald Trump's campaign, Jason Osborn and Mike Rubine, have recently been employed as lobbyists for Dodik. Their task is to help Dodik create, if possible, support in Washington for his plans to separate his “electoral zone” from Bosnia and Herzegovina.

It can be more feasible if Kosovo's new plan functions. The two helped organise meetings for Republika Srpska Prime Minister Zeljka Cvianovic during her visit to Washington a few weeks ago, including meetings with Congressman Rohrabacher and former White House Strategy chief Steve Bannon.

An exchange of territories between Kosovo and Serbia will not only enable the old dreams of Greater Serbia or Greater Albania, but also provoke a chain reaction throughout the region. Republika Srpska is only one of dozens of regional issues.

There is no need to be wise to understand that potential territorial trades are a way for a long-standing instability in the region and that this could cause catastrophic consequences.

In charge of a series of unresolved bilateral issues, still marked by the bloodshed of the 1990s and unwilling to face the ghosts of his past, the region could easily descend into a full confrontation.

The fact that politicians in the Balkans would best revisit borders rather than change their policies is no surprise. What comes as a surprise is the officials' mild stance on the idea.

The change in the political environment in Europe and marked relations between Europe and the US have led politicians from the Balkans to believe that now is the time to make their plans come true.

Facing structural challenges such as Brex or the new MiFID financial regulations and security challenges such as the Ukraine-Russia situation, the immigrant crisis, the Middle East or the Sahel region in Africa, where France has suggested the creation of a common European military force, the EU is struggling to preserve its unity.

The immigrant crisis is the most clear example of the EU's inability to agree on a common policy in a tangible area involving migration, security and relevant issues for cultural and national identity. So almost every day, rescue ships in the Mediterranean must expect an EU member state to show mercy and accept a new group of immigrants.

Moreover, the rise of nationalism and the popularity of extreme right movements in Europe and the US have brought back the ideology of <x0 vs. This is significantly resonant with Balkan nationalism.

US-EU relations are desperate. Disagreements with the current US administration and a continuing tariff struggle with the US are the last thing Brussels needs right now.

This is associated with Washington's growing non-announcement in areas of peripheral geopolitical importance for the US, which is inspiring to local leaders and their maximum ambitions.

In this context, the Western Balkans are far away on the EU priority list. They're out of Washington's attention. An ideal situation for those who want to review borders and history.

President Vuciq may feel encouraged by an EU and the weak with its disagreements with the US and with confused diplomatic statements coming from Brussels and Washington. These harmless reactions to the idea of partition confirm that the West has more important issues to address and that there is not enough time for the region.

Initially, US Ambassador to Kosovo Greg Delaway was reluctant to give a direct answer if the US rules out partition as a solution to talks between Serbia and Kosovo. Given that the region is very low in the State Department agenda, he may have had a problem with (lack) instructions from his centre.

The most disturbing part is the uncertainty coming from the EU High Representative's office, Federica Moghrini. In a recent public statement, her office made it clear that the “pals (Serbia and Kosovo) are setting the ground for a reconciliation with mutual consent”.

Like warning “Moranda” that US police give to the people they arrest, anything a foreign official says can and will be used by locals for their purposes. “Bilateral declaration”, for example, is a broad term that can be interpreted according to each one's interest.

When US Ambassador to Belgrade Kyle Scott called for a comprehensive “agreement, Vuciq could imagine a favourable “ ” solution, as the Serbian president described Kosovo's possible partition. The constructive diplomatic durability does not function well in our region.

At the same time, Russian Ambassador to Belgrade Alexander Chepurin does not have a problem with durability, saying that if “that is what Serbia wants, Russia supports partitioning Kosovo”.

That is why some civic associations and NGOs from Serbia and Kosovo called on the EU to react to any idea of partitioning Kosovo.

The reason for concern comes from proposals in which I can perceive the same ideological and irreverent model that triggered the war in Yugoslavia. Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it.

A good signal came from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who confirmed the invulnerability of borders in the Balkans and dismissed any possible exchange of territories.

A message of this kind comes right on time and is important, but the region needs more than words. He needs tangible political support and a resurrected EU perspective.

Key EU members, with Germany taking on special responsibilities, must increase their commitment to the region and act preventively.