Rama's approach to Vucinqi is not healthy

The approach of Edi Rama and Allexander Vuciqi is not the healthy “”, Edward Joseph, legalist at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, says Radio Free Europe.

In fact, it should be commemorated that a large Serbia leads to the creation of Greater Albania and vice versa. This is a very dangerous dynamic and it is breaking up in Kosovo, on the Iber River. The regional economic market is very important for all countries, but cannot be realised without European, democratic values.

Rather, it can be dangerous”, consider Joseph.

He adds that it is a unstable fact that Kosovo has not yet implemented the Constitutional Court's decision to return property to the Decani Monastery.

He also emphasises that Kosovo has the obligation to implement the decision to establish the Association of Serb majority municipalities, because it has accepted it in 2013 and 2015, in the context of the negotiations.

“Pristina can propose constructively how the Serb majority municipalities can be organised in harmony with Kosovo's sovereignty and territorial integrity, but also with the interests of Serbs there. It is very possible to form such an association that would not be Republika Srpska, thus contributing to the creation of faith”.

According to him, Serbian President Allexander Vuciq presents Serbia as a key partner in the region for the West, even though it is not.

The “is actually a destabilizing factor. You can't be a Western partner and at the same time promote the Serbian World, because these two things are incompatible. You cannot be a Western partner and at the same time promote Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, entering a strategic partnership with China and Russia”, Joseph points out.

Protests are a serious problem for Vucinqi

Radio Free Europe: In recent months, citizens of Serbia have protested in many cities on environmental issues, especially because of the company's controversial Rio Tinto project for Use of lithium. Has the position of Allnexandar Vuciqi seriously fluctuated, for the first time since coming to power nine years ago, or did he manage to control the damage by pushing controversial land expropriation laws and referendums, which at least partially temper public anger?

Edward Joseph: I think this is a serious problem for Allexander Vucicin and the autocratic regime, at whose head it is. He, nearly for a decade, leads the country back from a weak democracy, but still a democracy as it was in all previous governments after Slobodan Milosevic's fall until 2012. Since then, the governments headed by Allexander Vuciqi have been undemocratic. These protests about the environment are a challenge to him because they put forth primarily the demand for democracy to hear the voice of citizens in decision making.

The fact that demonstrations are massive, that they are not an expression of the policy of a certain party, but of the widespread discontent of citizens has to do with the very essence of democracy. In all things, people are unhappy because no one has asked them about their opinion when they made the decision So Rio Tinto can use lithium. It is a challenge for a regime that wants to present itself as powerful and successful by boasting about economic growth.

Radio Free EuropeYes, progressives are trying to control everything and not make room for dissident votes. If a breach in the system allows for various political actions, they fear that breach could expand.

Edward Joseph: Absolutely that's what this is about. Autocracy does not tolerate different opinions and strive for comprehensive and undemocratic control. This is about the power of a party and of a man and is therefore unliberal. Showing weakness is common in a democratic system, but it is incompatible with autocratic regimes.

If the government in Belgrade were democratic, it would be concerned about citizens' discontent in the case of Rio Tinto, but not so much, because protests are common in democratic systems. But in autocratic regimes demonstrations are not acceptable, and for this reason they are additional threats to the Vuciqi regime.

Radio Free Europe: What can be expected next? Elections in Serbia will be held after several months. Hence, many believe that Vuciq made a skillful maneuver by pushing the adoption of two laws mentioned for the post-election period in which, according to estimates, he will win again despite recent challenges. Or do you think that the opposition, which boycotted previous elections, because new early elections were announced, can do something about it?

Edward Joseph: I do not foresee a dramatic change in power structure. I do not see at this moment that the opposition has mobilised in such a way as to pose a threat to the Vuciki regime. I see no changes in the election environment, which continues to favour power, such as media control, despite the European Parliament's mediation.

So we have a highly unbalanized electoral environment that favours the regime. However, trends are very important for an autocratic regime. That means he is concerned about falling support, though even after these elections he will probably retain control over Parliament and Vuciq will remain president but weakened.

Radio Free Europe: The opposition sees the chance to jeopardise power, primarily, in Belgrade. If he were to win in the capital, this would be a serious blow to Vuciqi.

Edward Joseph: That would be significant, but not necessarily with transformative characters, in terms of risking power even at the national level. Good example for this are the recent elections in Kosovo. So, in February, Albin Kurti and Vjosa Osmani's party won a convincing victory in parliamentary elections and then suffered a serious blow losing local elections in many cities, including Pristina. But this does not mean that the Kosovo government will drop or announce early elections.

So, the loss of Belgrade and other countries would be a blow to the current power, but it doesn't necessarily lead to a national shift of power. We need to remember that this is a regime that has broken down democracy methodically and systematically, institutionalising corruption. In this way, he earns revenue, with which he undermines the activity of certain state institutions, the media, in some way the Serbian Orthodox Church. It no longer has its influence, nor does the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts.

Radio Free Europe: To create the impression that Vuciq has learned lessons from Slobodan Milosevic's fall. On the one hand, it seeks to avoid aggravating citizens' anger, as after then refusing to recognise the opposition's victory in the 1996 local elections, it also postponed the adoption of the two mentioned laws. On the other hand, many people fear it will be impossible to win against Vuciki in the election, because he will do everything to prevent an equal political game.

Edward Joseph: Not only Allnexander Vuciq, but others in this regime are veterans from the Milosevic era and have really taught them lessons. But they are now presenting more sophisticated, using, for example, the term “Serbian world”, instead of “Serbia's Great”, with Allexandander vulin as a promoter of that idea, until Vuciqi is declared.

Milosevic also presented himself as a Western partner. But the change lies in what the West at the time imposed sanctions on Serbia, while today there are no sanctions. Vuciqi exploits this by presenting Serbia as the key Western partner in the region, even though it is not. In fact, it's a destabilizing factor.

You can't be a Western partner and at the same time promote the Serbian “Bot” because these two things are incompatible. You cannot be a Western partner and at the same time promote Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin by entering a strategic partnership with China and Russia. It is not possible to be a real candidate for EU membership, while your closest partner is Hungary with a nonliberal regime that violates the values and integrity of the European bloc.

It should be remembered that, like Milosevic, Vucik uses frightening tactics. Of course other leaders do. If we go back to history, Tito was very clever and occasionally sided with the protesters.

Radio Free Europe: During student protests in 1968.

Edward Joseph: Yes, student protests in 1968, when Tito was very cleverly on his side, saying “students are right”. This is a way to understand or benefit protesters, but we must not forget that the Vuciki regime is capable of using frightening tactics and that it is not dedicated to Western but Chinese and Russian values, or to Victor Orban's Hungarian ones.

Radio Free Europe: You mentioned that, unlike Milosevic, Vuciq is not exposed to international sanctions. In fact, the global environment is now quite different than it was in the 1990s when we talk about the Balkans. Vucinqi is balancing Serbia's European path, playing at the same time as Russian and Chinese paper. These two countries are far more important on the international stage than in the 1990s. But can this tactic of Vucciki ultimately fail?

Edward JosephYes, I think it will fail. Autocracys are stronger in some situations, a person makes solutions easily, but they are more fragile, less flexible when cracks appear, such as environmental protests in Serbia.

If we compare the geopolitical environment of the 1990s, when Russia was weak and China was not obviously present in the Balkans and the current situation, then we can say that the interests of the United States are now much bigger or more different.

So in the 1990 ' s, the United States of America did not have to worry about rival Russian and Chinese influence. In that sense, the Balkans were even less important for Washington. There was humanitarian interest due to murder, ethnic cleansing and brutal shift at a time when Joe Biden's voice was very important. But the U.S. didn't have to worry about opponents, the regregation of democracy. It was a cell phone moment.

It was also the end of the failed Soviet model. So now we see challenges in the United States. Therefore, (US President Joe) Biden said witnessing that democracy functions is one of his administration's main goals and missions.

Because of all of this, the approach of Allexandar Vuciqi, regardless of the “confession.Balkans Open” and US support for economic normalisation in the region, which was the initiative of former president Donald Trump ʹ, is contrary to the Benden administration's commitment. Vuciqi's regime was very compatible with Trump's policy, but is essentially not with the democratic values of the Biden administration.

Radio Free Europe: Recently, however, Biden invited Vuciqi to the Democracy Summit.

Edward Joseph: That's a very good question. This was a mistake.. The more the American diplomatic mission in Belgrade first announced that Serbia would not cool off and then there was a turning point because of Kosovo, which was also invited to Sam. Kosovo is not a perfect democracy at all, but it is what Serbia was before the Vuciki regime.

It's a new democracy, powerless but empowering. Kosovo has democraticly elected governments in free and fair elections. No party had monopoly on the media and did not use frightening tactics to stay in power. On the contrary, former president Hashim Thaci had to resign and go to The Hague under pressure from the US and the EU to face war crimes charges, primarily against Serbs. Therefore, Kosovo deserved the invitation at the Summit for Democracy.

After that, a sudden turn occurred when it comes to Serbia, which under all democratic criteria, is a hybrid, unliberal, anti-democratic regime. Allexander Vuciqi did not deserve the platform to give the speech, in which he stressed how much his government supports democracy. Unfortunately, that was a mistake.

Radio Free Europe: It seems that geopolitical estimates were also at stake because Poland, Pakistan, the Philippines, Iraq, and some other countries that are far from perfect democracies were invited.

Edward Joseph: This is not the same situation, and these cases cannot be compared. When it comes to Serbia, it is not geopolitical. In fact, geopoliticality is linked to Serbia only through its leverage of influence in Kosovo. That is the only reason why there are no sanctions against authorities in Serbia. It is less under surveillance for corruption than any other country in the Balkans.

Former Albanian Prime Minister Sali Berisha has been sanctioned by the Biden administration for corruption. US Special Envoy for the Balkans Gabriel Escobar has made it clear that Corruption It's a problem in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Do you hear such statements about systematic corruption in Serbia? I haven't heard. The reason is the power lever Belgrade has over Kosovo and through this, Russia and China are ensuring their political influence in the region.

At the same time, these mechanisms of influence are available to Serbia, not because of the support of Russia and China, their blockade for Kosovo's UN membership. This is just a manifestation of the problem. The only reason is that five EU members, four of whom are also in NATO, do not recognise Kosovo. Had those four countries (Spanja, Greece, Romania and Slovakia) recognise Kosovo, Serbia would be left without the controversial instrument.

Also, Russian and Chinese influence in the region would be significantly reduced and would pave the way for a dignified, stabilising solution that would protect the status of Kosovo Serbs. This would also turn Serbia on the democratic road. So all of this would be possible if those four states knew Kosovo, because that would enable Kosovo to become a NATO member, after which Serbia could no longer block it.

In that case, preventing Kosovo's membership at the UN is far less important. Kosovo would have its own independent path towards international subjectivity, as an entire state without its secession requirement. This would create a completely different dynamic and encourage Serbia and Kosovo to negotiate a dignified and stabilising solution with the help of the US and EU.

Radio Free Europe: We will return to the Kosovo issue very soon. Before that, though, for the corruption you mentioned. The US recently imposed sanctions on controversial businessman from Kosovo, Zvonko Veselinovic and 13 other Serbs. Will Washington and the EU expand sanctions for corruption and violations of democratic standards, or are they still counting on reaching an agreement with Vucinqi for Kosovo and other issues in order to strengthen regional stability?

Edward Joseph: We have to wait and see what the real Benden administration strategy is in the fight against corruption. Setting sanctions against Veselinovic's organisation is certainly a positive sign. On the other hand, the invitation to Serbia at the summit for Democracy that same month gives the opposite signal.

So you have had the positive side of using the sanctions mechanism, which is a message to Belgrade, which, as you know, controls the Veselinovic organised crime network in northern Kosovo. That area is the hotbed of clashes with Pristina authorities due to the October police operation, which the US supported, meanwhile that authorities in Serbia protested.

Then, in the same month, Vuchchi received an undeserved invitation to the Democracy Summit, which sends the wrong message. This is not a signal of encouragement, because if that were the case, then Serbia would have been invited first. It was just an expression of weakness that I just mentioned, because of its leverage on Kosovo.

Radio Free Europe: Does this mean that the US and, above all, the EU, as mediators in the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, are still counting on Vuciqi, emphasising on the so-called “entitledocracy” instead of encouraging democratic forces. This assumes that if an agreement is reached, Vuciq would be its guarantor. Second, the West seems to have little confidence in the opposition, since it is as nationalist as the current government.

Edward Joseph: This is not about the quality of the Serbian opposition, but about the mechanism that enables the influence of official Belgrade in Kosovo, which is an obstacle to the establishment of democratic government and strengthens the Vuciqi regime. And this leverage is given to authorities in Serbia by the four countries named Greece, Spain, Slovakia and Romania. Changing their position would have a transformational effect on Belgrade. How can I say this with such confidence?

See how Vucin's regime is concerned about the warned change Greece's stance. This could be concluded on the basis of statements by officials in Athens. We also know it because of Serbia's Parliament Speaker Ivica Dacic's visit to the Greek capital and because of Foreign Minister Nikola Selakovic's tour and other officials in those countries, convincing them not to change their stance on Kosovo.

Thus, removing this lever from Serbia is not an anti-Serb stance, but a way for it to be released. I consider Kosovo can be admitted to the Partnership for Peace without recognition by Greece, Spain, Slovakia and Romania. That would send a strong signal to Belgrade and would positively influence dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo, as well as the situation in the region.

Radio Free Europe: If the US and the EU are pretending that they do not see the different types of violations of democratic principles in Serbia, Vuciq can interpret this as giving the opportunity for free hands, because he believes he needs them to reach an agreement on Kosovo. Thus, the West, at least not directly, supports the current government in Belgrade and decoupled the democratic opposition, perhaps considering it nationalist.

Edward JosephI agree with that assessment, except for the last part. This is not about the opposition and it doesn't matter whether its position is more difficult or flexible. So this is not the essence, but the removal of the barrier that is identical even to pro-democratic power, but also to anti-democratic power in Belgrade.

This means that with Kosovo's accession to NATO's Partnership for Peace, Serbia loses its current power lever. That would reduce the influence of Russia and China. What benefits could Vuciqi offer in such a new situation, because they could not prevent Kosovo's entry into the North-Atlantic Alliance if all its members agree to that?

Radio Free Europe: How would this affect the domestic political scene in Serbia?

Edward Joseph: Simply, because its strategy for isolation and weakening of Kosovo would fail. That would change its strategic estimate. Currently, Russia and China can no longer help with the most important issue, and that is Kosovo, however much tanks, fighter aircraft and fear to reassure Serbia. At that moment, Belgrade will have to address other, very good options, rather join Western order, becoming a responsible part of it.

That would mean the outcome of the history of the Serbian “Bota”, recognition of Kosovo's sovereignty and integrity, and negotiating a final solution, with the EU and US mediation, ensuring full protection for Kosovo Serbs and their religious objects, even creating conditions for the return of those displaced. That is possible because most Serbs live south of Ibri. Had it not been possible to co-existence with Albanians, they would have already left Kosovo.

This would then enable Serbs and Montenegrins in Montenegro to agree on the formula for coexistence. Later, opportunities for reforming the Dayton Agreement would be created, and relations between Serbia and Croatia would improve significantly.

In such a changing environment, Serbia could become a NATO member, which would be useful to it because it has a strong military industry. Of course, Serbia can maintain relations with Russia and China. Recently, it would also affect the domestic political scene, because the Western rule's accession implies respecting democratic standards, which could naturally strengthen the opposition without the continuing burden of the Kosovo issue.

This idea is fully feasible and not at the invitation of Vuciqi to the Summit for Democracy, or opening a chapter in negotiations with the EU regarding the rule of law, even though Serbia did not deserve it, but was achieved by European Commissioner Oliver Varhely, close associate of Viktor Orban.

Radio Free Europe: The US has appointed a special envoy for the Western Balkans, later for election reforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as US ambassador to Belgrade comes a highly experienced diplomat, Christopher Hill. Does this caution a significant change in Washington's approach to the region, his greater commitment, or will he remain low on the list of priorities, given the importance of relations with China, the crisis in Ukraine and the focus of Biden on the domestic agenda?

Edward Joseph: This is an evolutionary process. The appointment of Christopher Hill, a veteran diplomat in the region from the 1990s who replaces the current ambassador to Belgrade, whose mandate has not yet expired, is a very important signal. Here is also a highly experienced diplomat, Jeff Havenier, who comes to Pristina, then Michael Murphy, the new US ambassador to Sarajevo, who recognises Bosnia, Kosovo and the region as a whole.

These appointments show that Washington understands that the way up course doesn't work. This mosaic still lacks the part related to the lever of influence. Recent US sanctions against Zvonko Veselinovich and 13 other people are oriented to that. But initiatives such as the “Open Balkans”, economic normalisation, Vuciki's invitation to the Summit for Democracy, or the EU's decision to give the green light for the opening of the rule of law chapter in negotiations with Serbia are not a way to remove the leverage Belgrade has in its relationship with Kosovo.

The regional economic market is very important for all countries, but cannot be achieved without European, democratic values. On the contrary, it can be dangerous.

Look at China, which has traded with South Korea, Japan and earlier with Hong Kong, but has very low mutual confidence.

So economic normality, modeled after Trump's approach, offers certain benefits. But the real obstacle to economic growth in the region is political nature. Hence, there is resistance from Kosovo, Montenegro and Bosnia to join “Open Balkans”. If this initiative were so good and had nothing to do with making money, all these countries would be united.

This approach between Rama and Vucciki is not much of a friendly “”. So, you should remember that “Greater Serbia” leads to the creation of “Greater Albania”, and vice versa. This is a very dangerous dynamic and it breaks up in Kosovo, on the Iber River, which would lead to split into “Greater Serbia” and “Great Albania”. It is not in Western interest to create “Great Albania”, “Serbia's Great” and the division of Bosnia and Herzegovina into three parts. This is in the interest of Russia and China, but not the West.

Radio Free Europe: What can be expected of these appointments?

Edward Joseph: Like I said, it's evolved in character. First of all, with these appointments and statements, the Biden administration has long signaled that it is aware that the situation in the region is very serious. State Secretary Antony Blinken sent his adviser, Derek Chollet, to Bosnia and Herzegovina to deliver the powerful message, including Milorad Dodik.

So it is not true that the United States neglects the Western Balkans and that it does not see domestic threats, including those stemming from the actions of Russia and China. This confirms these appointments, but this is the process. The key element will not be “Open Balkans”. This is Vuciqi's game of accepting Trump's approach to economic normalisation, because it frees him from pressure.

The right path is through the Berlin Process, the regional council for EU co-ordination and values. This implies regional integration as part of European integration, common, democratic values, overcoming political stalemate for Kosovo, rather than insisting on the approach <x0th> people will trade and therefore will not be interested in politics”. That's not how it works.

Radio Free Europe: However, enlargement fatigue exists in the EU, and that is why alternative initiatives are emerging in this vacuum.

Edward JosephNice meeting. Expanding Loss It is a major problem and is a gift to Vuciqi, who can present it to voters as inconsistent and a lack of interest by European partners, to point out the example of northern Macedonia, which is blocked by Bulgaria on its road to the EU. The EU is doing nothing, just as Germany did not during its presidency, thus allowing Bulgaria, which is certainly not among the most powerful members, to prevent formal Skopje from negotiating with Brussels. Vuciq could also say that North Macedonia has changed its name to unblock the path of Euro-Atlantic integration, and official Sofia is now hindering it. And Vuchy's right when he says that. The question is how to solve this problem?

The more tensions and unrest in the Balkans -- the initiative such as the Serbian “Bota” -- the flight of combat aircraft and the appearance of the Russian ambassador on the border with Kosovo, the tensions in Montenegro, confrontations and tear gas in Cetinje, threats to Bosnia and Herzegovina's integrity will be less willing by the European public to approve the Balkan countries' accession. When French, German, Dutch and other European voters see the scenes mentioned in the media, they will surely say “we do not want these countries in the EU”.

The response to the tiredness of EU enlargement is to initially stabilise the region on principles of democracy, rather than stability. This can be achieved according to the model I mentioned, more precisely so that four NATO members could enable Kosovo's entry into the Partnership for Peace, which would significantly change the political dynamics in the Balkans, especially in the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, which is under the EU umbrella.

Radio Free Europe: However, despite the signals you mention from Greece, Spain, Romania and Slovakia, the question is whether they will be willing to accept Kosovo's entry into the Partnership for Peace?

Edward Joseph: Each of them is moving in a positive direction when it comes to this approach. Athens has issued an official statement making the difference between the Kosovo case and Northern Cyprus. Also, Spanish State Secretary for EU Affairs (Jian Gonzalez Barba) at a November meeting attended by Serbian Minister for European Integration Jadranka Joksimovic, warned that his country would change its position, in the sense that it would change its position. Kosovo will no longer be isolated. Minister Joksimovic reacted immediately to this statement.

When it comes to Slovakia, its government is democratic, pro-Western and anti-corruption. Romania is also tired of labeling it corrupt. She is very concerned because of Russian and Hungarian influence. Like Slovakia, Romania is concerned about the destabilising policy of official Budapest. These are issues that American and European partners can and are interested in solving. So there are various steps these states can take before the eventual recognition of Kosovo, which enable its membership in the Partnership for Peace.

As I said, this would change the dynamic in the Balkans, enabling its stabilisation. It will then be much harder for France, the Netherlands, Denmark and other sceptical countries to block EU enlargement in this region.